First Nations Child Removal and New South Wales Out-of-Home Care: A Historical Analysis of the Motivating Philosophies, Imposed Policies, and Underutilised Recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interactions between First Nations and non-Indigenous Australians have long been shaped by notions of Western authority and First Nations inferiority, both culturally and biologically. From invasion to the present day, forced removals and intergenerational trauma have deeply affected First Nations Australians, particularly through the operations of interacting colonial systems, including child removals and placements. Throughout the 20th century, systematic child removals led to the Stolen Generations, a tragic example of power imbalances, paternalism, and Western ideals, perpetuating trauma across generations. This article examines the context of First Nations removals by the state under the lies of benevolence, exposing the evolution of the colonial system and the systematic dislocation of culture and identity. It highlights the social, legal, and political factors that enabled removal practices and their enduring consequences, including the legacy of forced child separations and cultural erasure. This article argues that policies of absorption and assimilation served to further isolate children from their families, communities, and kinship networks. In doing so, it contends that the systematic disruption of First Nations communities is part of an ongoing process of subjugation, continuing the colonial agenda of cultural and familial disintegration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".