Was anybody else left "lost for words" and in total disbelief after hearing the story on the radio yesterday about Australia's forced adoption policy
I was staggered that a "civilised" democratic western country could be forcably removing children from their mothers to give to childless married couples ....as recently as the 1970's .. this story would have be appaling in the 1870's but one could have explained it away as different standards in earlier times ... but not 1970's Australia
My heart went out to the woman who had her baby taken from her at birth and the son who only discovered he was adopted at 24 .. who had his family life with his adopted parents "torpeodoed" and who has no relationship with his real mother...heart breaking from start to finish.... or am i just being a "woose"
Jack
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Stolen Generations
Quote by Green_Fox_71
Was anybody else left "lost for words" and in total disbelief after hearing the story on the radio yesterday about Australia's forced adoption policy
I was staggered that a "civilised" democratic western country could be forcably removing children from their mothers to give to childless married couples ....as recently as the 1970's .. this story would have be appaling in the 1870's but one could have explained it away as different standards in earlier times ... but not 1970's Australia
My heart went out to the woman who had her baby taken from her at birth and the son who only discovered he was adopted at 24 .. who had his family life with his adopted parents "torpeodoed" and who has no relationship with his real mother...heart breaking from start to finish.... or am i just being a "woose"
Jack
There was a story run for days around 6 years ago now, where children were taken away from parents who Social Services thought were a bit dim. Parents who had learning difficulties had their children taken away for no other reason. That was UK style 2007 ish, so I do not know why you are suprised by going on's in Australia as far back as the 70's as it is happening in the UK recently.
It is easy to find that children removed from their parents has increased hugely in the last ten years. Much more recent than 1970. Yes I am lost for words and in total disbelief as to what is happening in this very country, let alone a country on the other side of the planet.
Not seen the story, is this about the forced removal of white children from mothers or the killing of 10,000 aboriginies by the British Colonists during our rule from 1824 to 1908, or the 100,000 aboriginal children taken into care by australian authorities on the premise that aboriginies were dying out (for which the australian government apologised and discussed compensation.
This is a very good article about Australia's long term and continued abuse of power over families both black and white.
This is a very good article about Australia's long term and continued abuse of power over families both black and white.
Sex God
To my mind there seems no point in the Australian Prime Minister apologising for something her predecessors did when she herself was still in nappies. It doesn't achieve anything, it doesn't change anything, and it is not her that needs to apologise.
Quote by Trevaunance
To my mind there seems no point in the Australian Prime Minister apologising for something her predecessors did when she herself was still in nappies. It doesn't achieve anything, it doesn't change anything, and it is not her that needs to apologise.
If that is what this is all about Trev, then I agree 100% with you.
Have to disagree on this, to those who were victims an apology is important, ask any victim of WWII atrocities carried out by the Japanese, to them an apology is very important.
The fact that the PM was in nappies when the problem occurred is irellevant, Governments inherit history when they take office, they inherit the responsibilities of their predecessors, if they didn't how could they hope to learn from previous mistakes, how could they show they know the difference between right and wrong in the 21st century, if what was done by a government was only valid during their term of office the world would be a worse place than it is already, an apology is recognition by them that mistakes were made and that they understand the situation.
The fact that the PM was in nappies when the problem occurred is irellevant, Governments inherit history when they take office, they inherit the responsibilities of their predecessors, if they didn't how could they hope to learn from previous mistakes, how could they show they know the difference between right and wrong in the 21st century, if what was done by a government was only valid during their term of office the world would be a worse place than it is already, an apology is recognition by them that mistakes were made and that they understand the situation.
Sex God
It's pure symbolism. There is no tangible value or benefit to her apology.
I don't think it matters that the australian PM was in nappies ....the symbolism is important.
Those victims of this policy who packed the Oz parliament to hear the applogy thought it was important
This is the same as awarding medals to the Atlantic Convoy and Bomber Command crews from WW2 ..and the apologu given by the japanese for attrocities commeited against allied troops.
Those victims of this policy who packed the Oz parliament to hear the applogy thought it was important
This is the same as awarding medals to the Atlantic Convoy and Bomber Command crews from WW2 ..and the apologu given by the japanese for attrocities commeited against allied troops.
Well I sure as hell would not want to appologise for something that I had no personnel hand in, or for something that my predecessors had done.
If a person 35 years ago murdered a family member, I would not want that persons Grandson apologising on his behalf , that would have very little if any meaning to me, why would it?
If a person 35 years ago murdered a family member, I would not want that persons Grandson apologising on his behalf , that would have very little if any meaning to me, why would it?
Quote by starlightcouple
Well I sure as hell would not want to appologise for something that I had no personnel hand in, or for something that my predecessors had done.
If a person 35 years ago murdered a family member, I would not want that persons Grandson apologising on his behalf , that would have very little if any meaning to me, why would it?
Quite understandable for you, and for me, and for many, but it is not the person that is apologising, it is the Prime Minister, the President, the Emperor, and doing so on behalf of the Nation, past and present, it is the Office that is apologising.