A qualitative study explored the private realities of forty-five Australian Indigenous parents and carers who had experiences with child protection authorities. Interviews focused on the nature of the relationship between parents and authorities, how these regulatory encounters served to enlist or dissolve cooperation, and how child-focused outcomes could be delivered. The descriptions of encounters with authorities challenged the public hope for reconciliation between government and Indigenous Australians through reports of procedural injustice, failure by the authority to communicate and demonstrate soundness of purpose, and through lack of interest in identity affirmation and relationship building. In spite of these perceptions of integrity failings in how child protection authorities have operated, a positive role was acknowledged for authorities' future involvement, albeit with different strategies from those currently experienced. How this progression might be facilitated by principles of restorative justice and responsive regulation is discussed.l apo_354 80..103

No abstract

Child protection reform has been difficult, despite evidence that practice should be more child-centred, respectful and responsively inclusive of family and communities. An Australian survey of 387 third parties working with statutory child protection authorities revealed widespread support for reform, but significant opposition to child protection authorities. Only police aligned themselves with child protection authorities. Welfare and family workers were most likely to have defiant postures of resistance and disengagement and to criticize child protection authorities for their bureaucratic ritualism, poor accountability, low trustworthiness and social exclusion. Lawyers and special service providers shared some of these criticisms, while health and educational professionals remained neutral. System reform is likely to grind to a halt when essential third parties are adopting oppositional positions. Principle-led communities of practice that are multidisciplinary and community-inclusive may offer the best hope for cutting through reform gridlock and broadening and deepening capabilities.

No abstract

No abstract