Talk:Stolen Generations

How did it end?

Needs a para on what happened (in the 1960s) to make it end. 120.16.26.193 (talk) 02:32, 4 April 2018 (UTC)MBG

That's actually a really good question. I haven't seen the answer formally documented anywhere. It was probably all part of the progressive mood of the country at the time. This mood was shown in the Australian referendum, 1967 (Aboriginals), which was one of the few constitutional amendments ever passed in Australia, and it was passed overwhelmingly. It gave the federal government power to make legislation for Aboriginal people (it had previously been exclusively state government business), and said we would count Aboriginal people in the census. Without knowing for sure, I would guess that the state governments finally saw the light. I would love to hear from others on this. HiLo48 (talk) 03:08, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

It's been suggested that it's still going on. [1].

One of the first reactions people have to the film is, ‘oh my God, I had no idea this was happening. How can this still be happening, I thought this issue had been resolved.’

Daveosaurus (talk) 06:49, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Chronology progressed something like this:

1. the government perpetrated the Stolen Generations;
2. the government made an Apology to Australia's Indigenous peoples for stealing children;
3. the government simultaneously initiated the Northern Territory National Emergency Response to steal more children;
4. as of 30th June 2020, 79% of Indigenous children in care live permanently away from their birth parents and 85% aren't reunited with their families.

so yes, "It's been suggested that it's still going on" seems right on the money there. I would suggest an "Aftermath" section be added to the article which highlights how little official policy changes have changed actual attitudes and interventions. While we're at it, adding the above context to each of the mentioned articles (and not just a bare mention in the See Also list) would improve their coverage too. 49.195.32.54 (talk) 06:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

The STOLEN GENERATION continues, especially in the Australian state of Victoria 2403:5803:7E2B:7900:F40B:4AC7:BC27:E68E (talk) 05:47, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

That requires a little further explanation. HiLo48 (talk) 06:19, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Have a look at the linked forced adoption article as the history of both are linked. by the 60's the idea of foced adoption had been removed from popular opinion and the practice stopped. as it no longer occured for white people they could not argue its inclusion for the aboriginal tribes also.101.167.226.85 (talk) 22:56, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

That's NOT an example of something still going on. HiLo48 (talk) 06:19, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

History

Race theories and practice in Australia in the 20th century 196.207.44.208 (talk) 06:18, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Edit semi-protected

In the Notable people section, for Belinda Dann, could you change deceased at 107 to longest known lived survivor and then put (1900-2007) next to her name?--2600:100C:A201:DA57:E107:4764:B6BA:AFC6 (talk) 16:54, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: It already says "deceased at 107 years of age making her the longest-lived member of the stolen generation" RudolfRed (talk) 21:16, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Too many See Alsos?

Hello dear Wikipedians. While editing I realized there are a large quantity of See Also links - or, more than I am personally used to. I suggest that we cut down on these to maximize readability and prevent future readers from being overwhelmed by the many options. What do you think? Shall we cut down on these? If so, here are 2 possible pathways to reduce the size of the See Also.

• Creating a small section of the article describing similar comparable instances throughout history, such as "Similar events," as this seems to be the majority of the See Also links.
• Simply deleting the least pertinent See Also links.

Thank you and looking forward to hearing your thoughts. Evedawn99 (talk) 18:16, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2023

'The White Stolen Generations' section is irrelevant to main article and should be deleted. Instead, in the 'See also' section a link could be provided for 'Forced adoption in Australia'. Jack Charles should be added to 'Notable People' section. Contemporary child removal and discussions of a 'second Stolen Generation' should be included AnElectricShangriLa (talk) 02:01, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions, AnElectricShangriLa. I have added Jack Charles, and moved and reduced the size of the section on white stolen generations, but IMO it deserves a mention to explain how and why that term was applied, specifically in Australia, so left it there for now. Others may disagree - happy to abide by consensus.

Agree that there should be mention of contemporary child removal - thanks for the link - but I don't have time for it now so will leave for someone else or another day. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:43, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

References

"Between one in ten and one in three children"

Although it makes perfect sense mathematically, using "between" in this way seems awkward. I might have expected instead something more like: "At least one in ten, but perhaps as many as one in three children ..." Toddcs (talk) 22:29, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Inconsistent terminology

The terms used to refer to the affected children shifts around a lot in this article. Some of that seems due to direct quotes from different people or documents, but I noticed one point in the "policy in practice" section, which isn't clearly indicated as a quote, within the same sentence it uses both "half-caste" and "mixed-race" to refer to the same category of children. 2600:100A:B1E3:F50E:4C94:93A3:9918:5307 (talk) 06:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

As I read it, "half-caste" is only used in quotations or what are effectively quotations. It would be wrong to use it today outside quotations. "Mixed-race" is a term that wouldn't work to describe something happening in Australia today, but it's correct in the context of this article, where race was still a recognised concept for the duration of the stolen generations. HiLo48 (talk) 06:32, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Dicuss the term stolen generation and discuss the role and impact that pseudoscientific such as social darwism and eugenics have on the aborgine population of Australia

Ideas of race Australia 165.0.72.92 (talk) 17:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like you are asking for someone to write a school assignment for you? If so, this isn't the place for this request. Article talkpages are for discussing improvements to the article text, not requesting general commentary on the article topic. -- Euryalus (talk) 20:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

There is the reference desk though where you can ask questions. Wallby (talk) 08:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

There seems to be no information on this page about how this was advertised to Australian citizens at the time

I.e. was there propaganda? There seems to be leftover news advertisements.. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/fb-5948969/THE-STOLEN-GENERATIONS.html

Were there Australian citizens of the time who thought "what they were doing was helping?". This perspective seems to be missing from the article. Wallby (talk) 08:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

As maybe a ten year old in Australia in the 1950s, my parents told me how nice we white people were being to Aboriginal kids by putting them in special schools where they could learn to be housemaids and farm workers. I won't try to interpret that for you, except to say that, as far as most people were concerned, it was a well intentioned program. HiLo48 (talk) 09:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)