Punishing poverty happens when poverty and neglect are seen as the same thing. The Family Is Culture report confirmed that DCJ caseworkers see poverty as a risk factor and equate poverty with abuse and neglect (Davis 2019:214). This way of thinking still happens in DCJ. This is despite the Care Act explicitly saying that the Children’s Court cannot conclude that the basic needs of a child are likely not to be met only because of poverty (section 71(2)(b) of the Care Act).
The idea of child neglect continues to be used to inflict violence, racism, oppression and trauma on Aboriginal children and families (Newton 2021). Aboriginal children have a much higher percentage of neglect substantiations than non-Aboriginal children (AIHW 2021:29). Child neglect related issues like when DCJ say that ‘the child’s basic, physical, psychological or education needs were not being met, or were likely not to be met, by the child’s parents’ are the most common reason that Aboriginal children are being put into OOHC according to Family is Culture Report. The Family Is Culture Report also highlighted that cultural bias, judgment and racism influenced DCJ caseworkers’ assessments of Aboriginal families. Cumulative harm is often characterised as neglect, even if the accumulation of reports about a family might be because of the lack of action in other systems, or because of experiences of racism.
DCJ defines neglect as “When a child’s basic needs are not met… including not being given enough food, not being taken to the doctor, not getting support for disability, and not having a safe home to live.”
DCJ’s definition of neglect automatically assumes that all parents and families can afford to meet all these needs without support. It does not consider parents who are experiencing social disadvantage, struggling with money and living in poverty who cannot afford specialist and even basic medical appointments, housing in ‘safer’ neighborhood, etc.
When DCJ assessments are done, instead of acknowledging and understanding the different socio-economic circumstances that families and children live in, parents and families are instead judged and called neglectful where they might lack choice or opportunity. Those assessments often fail to consider how a parent is overcoming struggles, or their willingness to take support if it was offered.
One Aboriginal mother who participated in the Bring them home, keep them home research was moving out of a rental into supported temporary family accommodation. The mother was due to sign the lease before her second baby was born, but the baby arrived early. DCJ removed the baby because she had no stable accommodation and had not signed the lease before he was born. She would have been able to sign it and ‘have stable housing’ if he had not been born early. Then technically as she did not have baby, she was no longer eligible for the temporary family accommodation and was going to be kicked out. Like this mum, other Aboriginal parents are expected to juggle lots of competing goals, and DCJ didn’t show understanding of the challenging choices parents have to make because of this, including in situations of poverty (Family is Culture report, 2019).
Poverty isn’t bad parenting, but often the child protection system labels poverty as neglect. It’s the experience of families that workers can choose to either blame you or support you. You might have come up with ways to handle being in poverty, and caseworkers should be looking at your family’s strengths, like how you might be creative or resourceful with what you have. In DCJ’s ‘Measuring change assessment and the care and protection review’ it asks caseworkers to think about if there “are social and structural issues impacting on the family and their abilities or priorities? (e.g. poverty, geography, housing, transport).” You can remind them of this, and that they should be making active efforts to address those issues.
AbSec and our partners acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of Country throughout NSW and their continuing connections to land, waters, and communities. We also acknowledge the lands on which these stories were told, the lands of the Dharawal, Yuin and Wonnarua people.
We acknowledge the Elders, leaders and advocates that have led the way and continue to fight for our children. We also acknowledge the Stolen Generations who never came home and the ongoing impact of government policy and practice on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, young people and families.
This website shares the experiences and advice of Aboriginal families involved in the NSW child protection system who participated in the Bring Them Home, Keep Them Home research at UNSW. We acknowledge and thank the families who generously gave permission to share their stories.
These experiences reflect what worked for those families and do not constitute advice or views of AbSec. AbSec recommends seeking independent legal advice for your own circumstances.
