Child protection and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children
June 2012

• Contents

• Child protection statistics for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children
• Does child protection data tell us how many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children have been abused or neglected?
• What are the most common types of abuse and neglect?
• Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children living in out-of-home care
• The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle
• Why might Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children be more likely to be abused or neglected?
• Are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children abused or neglected more often than non-Indigenous children?
• References
• Acknowledgements

• Share or comment

• Leave a comment

In this paper we present and discuss a snapshot of data describing the rates of involvement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in child protection and out of home care.

Child protection statistics for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are over-represented in child protection and out-of-home care services compared to other Australian children and have been since the first data collation in 1990 (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare [AIHW], 2011).

Between 1 July 2010 and 30 June 2011, for every 1,000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in Australia, 34.6 had child protection records of substantiated harm or risk of harm from abuse or neglect. This means that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were 7.5 times more likely than non-Indigenous children to be the subject of substantiated reports of harm/risk of harm than non-Indigenous children (see Table 1). Child protection authorities are required to intervene if a child has been, is being, or is at risk of significant harm, therefore some of these children may not have been abused or neglected but were identified as being at risk of harm.

Table 1: The number of children aged 0-17 years who were the subject of substantiated¹ reports, rates per 1,000 children by Indigenous Status 2010-11

	Rate of maltreated Indigenous children per 1,000	Rate of maltreated non-Indigenous children per 1,000	Rate ratio2
Australia	34.6	4.5	7.6
ACT	54.8	4.2	13.1
Western Australia(b)	17.3	1.4	12.7
Victoria	50.4	5.4	9.4
South Australia	35.7	3.9	9.2
NSW(a)	46.5	5.2	8.9
Northern Territory	43.3	6.6	6.6
Queensland	24.6	3.9	6.2
Tasmania(c)	17.5	7.0	2.5

^(a) Following the NSW Keep Them Safe reforms, the 2010-11 data reflect the first full year of reporting under legislative changes to the NSW Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998, proclaimed on 24 January 2010. This includes raising the reporting threshold from "risk of harm" to "risk of significant harm". ^(b) Western Australia is currently unable to report a child's characteristics based on their first substantiation. As a result, a small number of children may be double-counted in this table if they have more than one substantiation and the notifications had differing characteristics such as age or abuse type. ^(c) In Tasmania, the proportion of substantiations for children with an unknown Indigenous status affects the reliability of these data.

Notes:

1. A substantiation refers to a case where an allegation that a child was "in need of protection" under state or territory law was found to be true.

2. The "rate ratio" is the number of times more likely an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander child is to be the subject of a substantiated report than other children (i.e., Aboriginal children in SA are 10.1 times more likely to be the subject of a substantiated report than other children in the state).

Source: AIHW (2012)

Does child protection data tell us how many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children have been abused or neglected?

Child protection data tells us how many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children come into contact with child protection services. It is the only data routinely collected in Australia that gives an idea of the number of children experiencing child abuse and neglect. However there are several problems with these data that result in some children who:

• have been abused or neglected not being included in child protection statistics; and
• have not been abused or neglect being included in child protection statistics.

See Bromfield & Higgins (2004) for a discussion.

In addition to these known problems with child protection data, there are several issues that contribute to the under-reporting of child abuse and neglect specifically in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. These include:

• fear, mistrust and loss of confidence in the police, justice system, government agencies and the media (Aboriginal Child Sexual Assault Taskforce, 2006; Anderson & Wild, 2007; Gordon, Hallahan, & Henry, 2002; Lievore, 2003);
• fear that the child may be removed from the community (Anderson & Wild, 2007);
• community silence and denial (Gordon, et al., 2002);
• social and cultural pressure from other members of the family or community not to report abuse or violence, and the belief that reporting is a betrayal of the culture and community (Aboriginal Child Sexual Assault Taskforce, 2006);
• a belief in the need to protect the perpetrator because of the high number of Indigenous deaths in custody (Stanley, Tomison, & Pocock, 2003);
• fear of repercussions or retaliation from the perpetrator or their family (Stanley et al., 2003);
• personal and cultural factors of shame, guilt and fear (Aboriginal Child Sexual Assault Taskforce, 2006; Anderson & Wild, 2007);
• lack of understanding about what child abuse and neglect is generally, and lack of understanding about what constitutes child sexual abuse specifically (Aboriginal Child Sexual Assault Taskforce, 2006; Anderson & Wild, 2007);
• language and communication barriers, lack of knowledge about legal rights and the services available, and lack of services for Aboriginal victims (Anderson & Wild, 2007); and
• geographical isolation (i.e., nobody to report to, no means of reporting and minimal contact with child welfare professionals) (Gordon et al., 2002; Stanley et al., 2003).
• In addition to the above, if the child is not correctly identified as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander these data may be unreliable.

What are the most common types of abuse and neglect?

In 2010-11, child abuse or neglect was substantiated or confirmed by statutory child protection services for 8,231 of 238,100 Indigenous children aged 0-17 years across Australia. Table 2 shows the distribution of these substantiations over the four different types of maltreatment and compares this distribution to substantiations involving other children.

Table 2: Percentage breakdown of primary substantiated maltreatment types in 2010-11 for Indigenous and non-Indigenous children

	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous
Neglect	37.8%	23.0%
Emotional abuse	32.3%	37.7%
Physical abuse	19.9%	23.8%
Sexual abuse	9.7%	15.3%
Total	100%	100%

Source: AIHW (2012)

As shown in Table 2, the primary types of maltreatment experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and non-Indigenous children are similar, except for neglect, which is the type of maltreatment that accounts for the highest proportion of substantiations in relation to Indigenous children, and sexual abuse which is more commonly identified in non-Indigenous children. In sharp contrast to media images of maltreatment in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, child sexual abuse was the least frequently substantiated maltreatment type for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. However, this is likely an under-estimation of the actual incidence of child sexual abuse (see box for discussion).

The maltreatment type most frequently experienced by Indigenous children was child neglect. Neglect refers to the failure (usually by the parent) to provide for a child's basic needs, including failure to provide adequate food, shelter, clothing, supervision, hygiene or medical attention. The high rates of neglect are consistent with the disadvantaged socio-economic conditions prevalent in many Indigenous communities, such as overcrowding, unemployment and lack of services (Calma, 2008).

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children living in out-of-home care

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are over-represented in the Australian out-of-home care system. In 2010-11, approximately 33% of all children in out-of-home care were identified as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander. The number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in out of home care rose by 9% from 10, 512 children in 2008-09 to 11,468 children in 2009-10 (AIHW, 2011). These numbers continued to rise a further 7% in 2010-11 with 12,358 (51.7 per 1,000) placed into out-of-home care. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were 10 times more likely than other children to be placed in care nationally with rate ratios ranging from 3.4 in Tasmania to 15.6 in Western Australia.

In all jurisdictions there were higher rates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in care than other children (see "rate ratio" in Table 3).

Table 3: State and territory data comparing rates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in out-of-home care compared to other children on 30 June 2011

	Number of children		Rates per 1,000 children		Rate ratio*
	Indigenous	Non Indigenous	Indigenous	Non Indigenous
WA	1,448	1,527	46.4	3	15.6
VIC	877	4,701	57.3	3.8	14.9
ACT	119	409	61.4	5.2	11.8
NSW	5,737	10,994	80.6	7	11.5
SA	630	1,690	49.6	4.9	10.1
QLD	2,850	4,722	40.2	4.6	8.7
NT	501	132	18.2	3.8	4.8
TAS	196	754	23.5	6.8	3.4
Australia	12,358	24,929	51.7	5.1	10.1

* The "rate ratio" is the number of times more likely an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander child is to be in care compared to non Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander children (i.e., Aboriginal children in NSW are 11.3 times more likely to be in care than other children in the state).

Source: AIHW (2012)

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander Child Placement Principle has been endorsed in legislation or policy in all Australian states and territories. The principle states the preferred order of placement for an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child who has been removed from their birth family. The preferred order is for the child to be placed with:

1. the child's extended family;
2. the child's Indigenous community; or
3. other Indigenous people.

Only if an appropriate placement cannot be found from the three groups can an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander child be placed with a non-Indigenous carer (Lock, 1997).

The principle provides an important acknowledgement that previous policies caused suffering to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and reflects the right of Indigenous people to raise their children and retain them in their communities (Lock, 1997).

The percentage of children placed with relatives/kin, other Indigenous caregivers or in an Indigenous residential care facility varied substantially across jurisdictions (see Table 4). In Australia in 2010-11, 69% of Indigenous children were placed with relatives/ kin, other Indigenous caregivers or in Indigenous residential care) (AIHW, 2012).

Table 4: Percentage of placements in accordance with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle across Australia

	Number of children			Percentage
	Preferred placement	Non-preferred placement	Total Placements	Preferred placement	Non-preferred placement
NSW	4,707	1,005	5,712	82.4	17.6
QLD	1,495	1,355	2,850	52.5	47.5
WA	1,029	417	1,446	71.2	28.8
VIC	504	373	877	57.5	42.5
SA	454	153	607	74.8	25.2
NT	166	330	496	33.5	66.5
TAS	84	112	196	42.9	57.1
ACT	76	43	119	63.9	36.1
Australia	8,515	3,788	12,303	69.2	30.8

Source: AIHW (2012, Table A1.25 p. 71)

* A small amount of children are placed with externally arranged fosters carers who are also their relatives and have been recorded in another category.

Why do states and territories fail to place children in accordance with the principle?

States and territories fail to place children in accordance with the preferred placement types in the principle primarily because there is a shortage of Indigenous carers. Recruitment and retention of carers is a problem across the sector for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous carers (see Osborn, Panozzo, Richardson, & Bromfield, 2007). However, there are several other factors that are unique to Indigenous communities and put severe strain on the ability for out-of-home care services to recruit appropriate Indigenous carers. Three of the main factors are:

• trauma and disadvantage associated with the stolen generations affecting many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults today, to the extent that they are not able to care for children;
• the unwillingness of some Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders to be associated with the "welfare" system due to past government practices, including forced removal; and
• the disproportionately high number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children compared to adults.

For more information see Why is There a Shortage of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Carers? (PDF 392 KB) (Bromfield, Higgins, Higgins, & Richardson, 2007).

Why might Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children be more likely to be abused or neglected?

The reasons why Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children might be more likely to be abused or neglected are complex, and need to be approached with consideration of multiple historical, social, community, family and individual factors (Calma, 2008; Cripps & McGlade, 2008; Stanley et al., 2003).

The Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission (1997) report, Bringing Them Home, concluded that some of the underlying causes for the poor outcomes experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and for the over-representation of Indigenous children in child protection and out-of-home care were:

• the legacy of past policies of forced removal and cultural assimilation;
• intergenerational effects of forced removals; and
• cultural differences in child-rearing practices.

Historical and ongoing dispossession, marginalisation and racism experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders have led to high levels of unresolved trauma and grief among Australian Indigenous people (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, 1997). Internalised trauma may be expressed by individuals in various ways including psychological distress and destructive behaviours (Atkinson, 2002). Concerns have been voiced that some Indigenous communities are experiencing intergenerational cycles of adversity and trauma, leading to entrenched social problems including poverty, high levels of violence, child abuse and neglect, and individual, family and community dysfunction (Atkinson, 2002; Robertson, 2000; Silburn et al., 2006; Stanley et al., 2003).

Some of the key individual, family and community problems associated with unresolved trauma that have also been associated with heightened rates of child abuse and neglect in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities include:

• Alcohol and drug abuse
  There is extensive research establishing links between drug and alcohol abuse and child maltreatment (Dawe, Harnett, & Frye, 2008). While Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders are less likely to consume alcohol than non-Indigenous Australians, those who do so are more likely to drink at risky levels. Indigenous people are more likely to have tried illicit drugs and to have used them in the past 12 months (Pink & Allbon, 2008). In recent inquiries, substance misuse, particularly alcohol abuse, has been noted as a principal factor contributing to child abuse and neglect (Aboriginal Child Sexual Assault Taskforce, 2006; Anderson & Wild, 2007; Gordon et al., 2002; Robertson, 2000).
• Family violence
  Over the period 2006-07 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were 34 times more likely to be hospitalised as a result of domestic violence compared to non-Indigenous people (Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision, 2009). The true rate of violence in many communities is also likely to be higher than what is reported (Robertson, 2000; Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision, 2009). The level of family violence in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities presents an enormous risk to the safety and wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and increases the likelihood that they will experience other forms of maltreatment (Anderson & Wild, 2007; Robertson, 2000).
• Pornography
  Several prominent enquiries and reports discuss concerns about the use of pornography in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and child sexual assault (Aboriginal Child Sexual Assault Taskforce, 2006; Anderson & Wild, 2007; Gordon, 2006; Stanley et al., 2003). Exposing children to pornography is in itself a form of abuse. There is also anecdotal evidence of access to pornography being used by adults to barter for sex with children and young people and of sexual attacks in communities escalating after the arrival of a shipment of pornography. Further, concerns have been raised about the role of pornography in conveying a distorted view of male and female sexual behaviour, normalising violent sexual behaviour and inappropriately sexualising communities (Aboriginal Child Sexual Assault Taskforce, 2006; Anderson & Wild, 2007; Gordon, 2006; Stanley et al., 2003).
• Overcrowded and inadequate housing
  Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are more likely than non-Indigenous people to live in overcrowded or inadequate housing (Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision, 2009). Inadequate housing is a major contributing factor to issues of child neglect. Stress associated with overcrowding can also contribute to family violence. Inadequate housing can place children at risk of physical and sexual assault as carers may not be able to lock doors and so protect children (and themselves) from intruders (Robertson, 2000). Concerns have also been raised that overcrowding and lack of privacy puts children at higher risk of sexual abuse and may expose children to adult sexual activity and/or pornographic materials leading to inappropriate child sexualisation (Anderson & Wild, 2007).

Are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children abused or neglected more often than non-Indigenous children?

Child protection data do not reliably tell us how many Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander children are abused or neglected in any given year. However, they do show a consistent pattern of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children being substantially over-represented in every area of the child protection system (AIHW, 2011). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are more likely than others in the community to experience problems commonly associated with child abuse and neglect (e.g., alcohol abuse, domestic violence) (Scott & Higgins, 2011). Several prominent inquiries conducted in Australia over the last two decades have highlighted concerns that children in some Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are at high risk of experiencing abuse and neglect (Anderson & Wild, 2007; Atkinson, 1990; Gordon et al., 2002; Memmott, Stacy, Chambers, & Keys, 2001; Northern Territory Government, 2010; Robertson, 2000). Responding to the entrenched social and economic factors that contribute to the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in statutory care and protection services is a critical challenge recognised by Australian state, territory and Commonwealth governments (Bromfield & Holzer, 2008).

References

• Aboriginal Child Sexual Assault Taskforce. (2006). Breaking the silence: Creating the future. Addressing child sexual assault in Aboriginal communities in NSW. Sydney: NSW Attorney General's Department.
• Anderson, P., & Wild, R. (2007). Ampe akelyernemane meke mekarle - Little children are sacred. Report of the Northern Territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse. Darwin: Northern Territory Government.
• Atkinson, J. (1990). Violence against Aboriginal women. Reconstitution of community law - the way forward. Aboriginal Law Bulletin, 2(46), 6-9.
• Atkinson, J. (2002). Trauma trails, recreating song lines: The transgenerational effects of trauma in Indigenous Australia. North Melbourne: Spinifex Press.
• Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2011). Child protection Australia 2009-10. Canberra, ACT: AIHW.
• Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2012) Child protection Australia 2010-11. Canberra, ACT: AIHW.
• Bromfield, L. M., & Higgins, D. J. (2004). The limitations of using statutory child protection data for research into child maltreatment. Australian Social Work, 57(1), 19-30.
• Bromfield, L. M., Higgins, J. R., Higgins, D. J., & Richardson, N. (2007). Why is there a shortage of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander carers? (Promising Practices in Out-of-Home Care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Carers and Young People: Strengths and Barriers. Paper 1). Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
• Bromfield, L. M., & Holzer, P. J. (2008). Protecting Australian children: Analysis of challenges and strategic directions. (PDF 2.5 MB) Retrieved from <www.aifs.gov.au/nch/pubs/reports/cdsmac/protecting.pdf>.
• Calma, T. (2008). Social justice report 2007. Sydney: Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission.
• Cripps, K., & McGlade, H. (2008). Indigenous family violence and sexual abuse: Considering pathways forward. Journal of Family Studies, 14(2-3), 240-253.
• Dawe, S., Harnett, P., & Frye, S. (2008). Improving outcomes for children living in families with parental substance misuse: What do we know and what should we do? (Child Abuse Prevention Issues No. 29). Retrieved from <www.aifs.gov.au/nch/pubs/issues/issues29/issues29.html>.
• Gordon, S. (2006). Cultural conceptualisation of child abuse and responses to it: An Aboriginal perspective. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 28, 18-35.
• Gordon, S., Hallahan, K., & Henry, D. (2002). Putting the picture together: Inquiry into Response by Government Agencies to Complaints of Family Violence and Child Abuse in Aboriginal Communities. Western Australia: Department of Premier and Cabinet.
• Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. (1997). Bringing Them Home.
• Lievore, D. (2003). Non-reporting and hidden recording of sexual assault: An international review. Report prepared by the Australian Institute of Criminology for the Commonwealth Office of the Status of Women. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
• Lock, J. (1997). The Aboriginal Child Placement Principle. Sydney, NSW: New South Wales Law Reform Commission.
• Memmott, P., Stacy, R., Chambers, C., & Keys, C. (2001). Violence in Indigenous Communities. Canberra Commonwealth of Australia.
• Northern Territory Government. (2010). Growing them strong, together: Promoting the safety and wellbeing of the Northern Territory's children. Summary report of the board of inquiry into the child protection system in the Northern Territory 2010, M. Bamblett, H. Bath, and R. Roseby. Darwin, Northern Territory Government.
• Osborn, A., Panozzo, S., Richardson, N., & Bromfield, L. M. (2007). Foster families (Research Brief No. 4). Retrieved from <www.aifs.gov.au/nch/pubs/brief/rb4/rb4.html>.
• Pink, B., & Allbon, P. (2008). The health and welfare of Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples 2008. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.
• Robertson, B. (2000). The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women's Task Force on Violence Report. Brisbane, Australia: Queensland Department of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy and Development.
• Scott, D. A., & Higgins, D. J. (2011) Supporting families in Northern Territory Emergency Response: Evaluation report 2011. Canberra: Department of Families Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.
• Silburn, S. R., Zubrick, S. R., Lawrence, D. M., Mitrou, G. G., DeMaio, J. A., Blair, E. et al. (2006). The intergenerational effects of forced separation on the social and emotional wellbeing of Aboriginal children and young people. Family Matters, 75, 10-17.
• Stanley, J., Tomison, A. M., & Pocock, J. (2003). Child abuse and neglect in Indigenous Australian communities (Child Abuse Prevention Issues No. 19). Retrieved from <www.aifs.gov.au/nch/pubs/issues/issues19/issues19.html>
• Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision. (2009). Overcoming Indigenous disadvantage: Key indicators 2009 report. Canberra: Productivity Commission.

Acknowledgements

This paper was updated by Deborah Scott, Research Fellow with the Child Family Community Australia information exchange at the Australian Institute of Family Studies.

Previous editions were compiled by Dr Leah Bromfield, Briony Horsfall, Alister Lamont and Mel Irenyi.

Publishing details

Published by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, June 2012

Please advise the CFCA information exchange team if you are citing this paper.

Copyright information