‘Could you see to the return of my daughter’: Fathers and daughters under the New South Wales Aborigines protection board child removal policy

Haskins, Victoria

doi:10.1080/10314610308596239

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…7. Haskins (2003) documents an Aboriginal father in 1939 asking for the return of his daughter, who had been taken from his care by the NSW Protection Board.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for “moral betterment”

Greer

McNicholas

2017

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse the roles of accounting within state-based agencies which interpreted the ideal of protection for the Aboriginal population as principally about the removal of children from the Aboriginal communities to institutions of training and places of forced indenture under government-negotiated labour contracts. Design/methodology/approach The study uses the original archival records of the New South Wales Aborigines Protection and Welfare Boards (1883-1950) to highlight the link between pastoral notions of moral betterment and the use of accounting technologies to organise and implement the “apprenticeship” programmes. Findings The analysis reveals that accounting practices and information were integral to the ability of the state to intervene and organise this domain of action and, together with a legal framework, to make the forced removal of Aboriginal children possible. Social implications The mentalities and practices of assimilation analysed in the paper are not unique to the era of “protection”. The study provides a history of the present that evokes the antecedents to recent welfare policy changes, which encompass a political rationality directed at the normalisation of the economic and social behaviours of both indigenous and non-indigenous welfare recipients. Originality/value The paper provides an historical example of how the state enlisted accounting and legal technologies to construct a crisis of “neglect” and to intervene to protect and assimilate the Aboriginal children.

show abstract

“…7. Haskins (2003) documents an Aboriginal father in 1939 asking for the return of his daughter, who had been taken from his care by the NSW Protection Board.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for “moral betterment”

Greer

McNicholas

2017

AAAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

‘Let us go’ … it’s a ‘Blackfellows’ War’: Aborigines and the Boer War

Maynard¹

2015

Aboriginal History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Power and Dysfunction: The New South Wales Board for the Protection of Aborigines 1883–1940

Egan¹

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By 1911 all mainland Australian states had enacted restrictive legislation concerning their Aboriginal populations. In New South Wales such legislation was passed in 1909 and by 1936 had been amended on three occasions. The enormous damage of these policies on Aboriginal people and their communities has been well canvassed. Several issues are less clear: how the New South Wales Board for the Protection of Aborigines (1883Aborigines ( -1940 (hereafter the Board) functioned and interacted with Aboriginal people; who of the sixtyfour Board members drove the policy agenda; and what other factors influenced Board policy?Through an exploration of the Board's records, and of its interaction with the Dharawal people (who occupied the mainly coastal land south of Sydney to the Shoalhaven River), together with research on the biographies of its members, this thesis tracks in detail the Board's policy shifts.Three significant conclusions emerge. First, most Board members had little influence, while a few others drove policy. Second, the Board went through three quite different stages.Initially, from 1883 to 1897, the Board was cautious and, at times, indifferent to its clientele. The next period, up to 1916, witnessed a burst of legislative activity driven by powerful and zealous individuals. In its final phase, the Board was characterised by a small, unaccountable cabal of Board officials who dominated the policy agenda. With minimal external scrutiny, the Board became insular, paranoid, secretive and reluctant to embrace new thinking on Aboriginal affairs.Despite the Board's power, a third conclusion of this research has exposed the Board's limitations. Through its bravado, structural dysfunction, flawed policies, and general indifference, it failed to manage core aspects of Aboriginal policy.

show abstract

‘Could you see to the return of my daughter’: Fathers and daughters under the New South Wales Aborigines protection board child removal policy

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

Accounting for “moral betterment”

Accounting for “moral betterment”

‘Let us go’ … it’s a ‘Blackfellows’ War’: Aborigines and the Boer War

Power and Dysfunction: The New South Wales Board for the Protection of Aborigines 1883–1940

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About