Who knows anything about the stolen generation?

Follow
  • Follow publicly
  • Follow privately
  • Unfollow
once the aboriginal children were taken from their families, where did they take them, and what did they have to do?
Best Answer
The taken children lost their own heritage, such as had been left by years of genocide.

Try Rabbit proof fence, but for more detail there is a book by Sally Morgan called "My Place".

I did wonder whether this was going to refer to children in Australia or the Native Americans. But there are many cases of conquered peoples not being allowed to speak their own language, (though not taken off to "school") which is as good a way as any for killing off a culture.

The stolen generation could also apply to a practice in which children are taken from parents who are not looking after them properly, or so the authorities think. Instead of fostering out these children they are adopted, even when there are relatives around who might be able to care for them. (At least this is what seems to happen from the fuss made in the media.) Unfortunately there was little, if any, publicity about the stolen children in Australia at the time.
  • Rate
  • Comment

Other Answers (3)

Rated Highest
  • Rated Highest
  • Oldest
  • Newest
  • emazen answered 5 years ago
    To missionaries, learn a whole new life,language... Rabbit Proof Fence is a good movie to watch to understand the stolen generation.
    • 1
    • Comment
  • titacabreros answered 5 years ago
    The Stolen Generations (also Stolen generation and Stolen children) is a term used to describe those children of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander descent who were removed from their families by the Australian and State government agencies and church missions, under acts of their respective parliaments. The removals occurred in the period between approximately 1869 and 1969,although, in some places, children were still being taken in the 1970s.

    The extent of the removal of children, and the reasoning behind their removal, are contested. Documentary evidence, such as newspaper articles and reports to parliamentary committees, suggest a range of rationales. Motivations evident include child protection, beliefs that given their catastrophic population decline post white contact that black people would "die out" , fears of miscegenation[citation needed] and a desire to attain white racial purity.

    Terms such as "stolen" were used in the context of taking children from their families - the Hon P. McGarry, a member of the Parliament of New South Wales, objected to the Aborigines Protection Amending Act 1915 which enabled the Aborigines' Protection Board to remove Aboriginal children from their parents without having to establish that they were in any way neglected or mistreated; McGarry described the policy as "steal[ing] the child away from its parents".. In 1923, in the Adelaide Sun an article stated "The word 'stole' may sound a bit far-fetched but by the time we have told the story of the heart-broken Aboriginal mother we are sure the word will not be considered out of place."

    Indigenous Australians in most jurisdictions were "protected", effectively being wards of the State. The protection was done through each jurisdictions' Aboriginal Protection Board, in Victorian and Western Australia these boards were also responsible for applying what were known as Half-caste acts.

    More recent usage was Peter Read's 1981 publication of The Stolen Generations: The Removal of Aboriginal children in New South Wales 1883 to 1969. The 1997 publication of Bringing Them Home - Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families brought broader awareness of the "Stolen Generations."

    The acceptance of the term in Australia is illustrated by the 13 February 2008 formal apology to the Stolen Generations[13], led by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, and passed by both houses of the Parliament of Australia. Previously apologies had been offered by State and Territory governments in the period 1997-2001.

    There however remains opposition to acceptance of the validity of the term "Stolen Generations". This was illustrated by the former Prime Minister John Howard refusing to apologise and the then Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, John Herron controversially disputing the usage in April 2000. Others who dispute the validity of the term include: Peter Howson, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs in 1971-72, Keith Windschuttle and Andrew Bolt Others argue against these critics, responding to Windschuttle and Bolt in particular.

    On December 11, 2007, the newly installed Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced that an apology would be made to Indigenous Australians, the wording of which would be decided in consultation with Aboriginal leaders. On January 27, 2008, Rudd announced that the apology would be made on or soon after the first day of parliament in Canberra, on February 12. The date was later set to February 13, when it was ultimately issued.

    Source(s):

    • 1
    • Comment
  • cally l answered 5 years ago
    The movie "Barbwire fence" is a clear idea as to what happened and why.
    I was horrified as we used to be told at school to bring pennies for the black babies with out explanations.
    It also happened to the American Indian babies
    • Rate
    • Comment
  • Sign In 

    to add your answer

Who is following this question?

    %
    BEST ANSWERS
    Member Since:
    Points: Points: Level
    Total Answers:
    Points this week:
    Follow
     
    Unfollow
     
    Block
     
    Unblock