Proposed Changes to Child Protection Systems Threaten Indigenous Safeguards
Governments in Queensland and the Northern Territory are considering significant changes to their child protection systems. Advocates warn these changes could erode hard-won protections for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families that were established in the 1990s.
Key Concerns in the Northern Territory
The Northern Territory government is proposing to replace the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle (ATSICPP) with a new "universal principle." Under this proposed change, removal would be prioritized if there is a "significant risk of harm," and placement would focus on "close proximity" to family rather than cultural connection.
Advocates argue this undermines the core intent of the ATSICPP, which was designed to ensure Indigenous children maintain vital connections to family, culture, community, and country. The principle was built on the understanding that removal should be a last resort.
"There should not be a debate between culture and safety. Culture is safety."
— Catherine Liddle, CEO of SNAICC – National Voice for Our Children
Liddle argues that the focus should be on how systems have already failed communities and harmed children, rather than weakening cultural safeguards.
Queensland's Approach
In Queensland, a child safety commission of inquiry has recommended that adoption be considered as a "genuine permanency option" for children—including Indigenous children—who cannot return to their families.
Barrister Joshua Creamer (Waanyi and Kalkadoon) stated that this recommendation is inconsistent with evidence presented to the inquiry. He noted that adoption, by its nature, cuts all legal ties with the child's Indigenous family, posing a direct threat to cultural continuity.
The inquiry made 52 recommendations in total, including the removal of all children under five from residential care.
Voices from the Community
Melissa (name changed), an Aboriginal and South Sea Islander woman in Brisbane, shared her family's long struggle with the child protection system. She emphasized the enduring strength of Indigenous family structures.
"This is actually the systems that we’ve had for 65,000 years, that have worked and done beautifully."
— Melissa, an Aboriginal and South Sea Islander woman
Kay Smith, a former foster carer in Alice Springs, opposes the Northern Territory's proposed changes. She stated that Indigenous children are best cared for in their own community and advocated for addressing root causes like poor housing, healthcare, and food security instead.
Government Response
Northern Territory Children's Minister Robyn Cahill stated that the ATSICPP continues to guide decision-making. She said the intent of the new legislation is to have fewer children in out-of-home care by directing support to families sooner.
The Historical Context: The Stolen Generations
The proposed changes are being viewed through the lens of a painful history. During the Stolen Generations (1910–1970), between 10% and 33% of Indigenous children were forcibly removed from their families under a genocidal policy of assimilation. An estimated 17% of those removed were adopted, the vast majority by non-Indigenous families.
The ATSICPP was established in the 1990s specifically to prevent a repeat of this history and to ensure Indigenous children maintain their cultural connections.
The Potential Impact
Advocates warn that the proposed changes could lead to a significant increase in the number of Indigenous children placed with non-Indigenous families. This could sever cultural ties, exacerbate intergenerational trauma, and repeat the mistakes of the past.
The core concern remains that prioritizing proximity over culture—and adoption over family preservation—undermines the very principles designed to protect Indigenous children and their communities.