Australian Psychological Society apologizes to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People

Australian Psychological Society, Media Statement, Thursday 15th September 2016:

Today, the Australian Psychological Society will issue a formal apology to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People, acknowledging psychology’s role in contributing to the erosion of culture and to their mistreatment.

APS President Professor Michael Kyrios said the apology was an important move in redressing past wrongs and ensuring the psychology profession collaborates and appropriately serves Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

“The apology is only one of many initiatives by the Australian Psychological Society to work together with Indigenous psychologists and communities to meet the social and emotional wellbeing and mental health needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.”

Professor Pat Dudgeon - a Fellow of the Society and Australia’s first Aboriginal psychologist - said, "This is a tremendous moment for Australian psychology. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and psychologists are delighted that the APS has taken this important step."

The apology will be made at the Australian Psychological Society Congress 2016 in Melbourne at 1.00pm, following a keynote by Professor Pat Dudgeon on an emerging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander psychology.

Full apology:

Apology to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People from the Australian Psychological Society. Disparities between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians and other Australians on a range of different factors are well documented. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience much higher rates of psychological distress, chronic disease, and incarceration than other Australians. They manage many more stressors on a daily basis and, although suicide did not exist in their cultures prior to colonisation it is now a tragically inflated statistic. The fact that these disparities exist and are long standing in a first world nation is deplorable and unacceptable.

As we understand these challenging issues in relation to wellbeing and health, it is very important that we tell the stories of the strengths and resilience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are the proud custodians of the longest surviving cultures on our planet. With this in mind, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ resilience and resourcefulness could make a significant and positive impact on Australian society should they have the opportunity to contribute routinely in their areas of expertise.

We, as psychologists, have not always listened carefully enough to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We have not always respected their skills, expertise, world views, and unique wisdom developed over thousands of years. Building on a concept initiated by Professor Alan Rosen, we sincerely and formally apologise to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians for:

·         Our use of diagnostic systems that do not honour cultural belief systems and world views;

·         The inappropriate use of assessment techniques and procedures that have conveyed misleading and inaccurate messages about the abilities and capacities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people;

·         Conducting research that has benefitted the careers of researchers rather than improved the lives of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participants;

·         Developing and applying treatments that have ignored Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander approaches to healing and that have, both implicitly and explicitly, dismissed the importance of culture in understanding and promoting social and emotional wellbeing; and,

·         Our silence and lack of advocacy on important policy matters such as the policy of forced removal which resulted in the Stolen Generations.

To demonstrate our genuine commitment to this apology, we intend to pursue a different way of working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people that will be characterised by diligently:

·         Listening more and talking less;        

·         Following more and steering less;

·         Advocating more and complying less;

·         Including more and ignoring less; and,

·         Collaborating more and commanding less.

Through our efforts, in concert and consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, we envisage a different future.

This will be a future where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people control what is important to them rather than having this controlled by others.

It will be a future in which there are greater numbers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander psychologists and more positions of decision making and responsibility held by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Ultimately, through our combined efforts, this will be a future where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people enjoy the same social and emotional wellbeing as other Australians.

                                               -Ends-

Are you satisfied with the performance of Turnbull and Shorten?

Interactive Graph, 12 September 2016:

Essential Research, 13 September 2016:

The Australian, 12 September 2016:

So why is the Turnbull Government toadying to the religious right when it comes to marriage equality?

Why is the Turnbull Government toadying to the religious right when it comes to marriage equality?

It is a bit of a puzzle when religion appears to mean so little to couples deciding to marry.

For instance, there were 121,197 marriages registered in Australia in 2014 and only 31,336 (or 25.8%) of the marriage services were conducted by a minister of religion, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

At least 79.4 per cent of all these couples co-habitated before marriage.

In 2014 a total of 299,697 births were recorded of which an est. 34.6% were born outside of a registered marriage.

If one looks at the broader picture – the 2011 Census records that that 67.3% of the population professed to having a religion.

Only 48.7% of the 2011 population over 15 years of age were married, 5.5% were widowed and 45.8% were never married, separated or divorced.

In 2011 a total of 301,617 births were recorded of which an est. 34.18% were born outside of a registered marriage.

Similarly In 2010 a total of 297,903 births were recorded of which an est. 33.63% were born outside of a registered marriage.

Given that the majority of religions practiced in Australia have some form of prohibition on the sexual conduct of unmarried males and females and encourage legally binding marriage, one has to suspect that an individual’s religious beliefs do not necessarily have any impact on how they choose to enter into partnerships for life or what type of partnerships these may be.

Nor does religious belief appear to play a large part in decisions to start a family.

As for the last stage of life, McCrindle Research (2014) states that in Australia; Cost is the biggest influencer when planning a funeral with 2 in 3 (66%) Australians stating it is extremely or significantly influential. Cost is considered more important than both religion or life philosophy (31%) and culture and family traditions (27%) and Over half (58%) of the population would prefer to have a civil celebrant conduct their funeral.

Which indicates that religious beliefs are no longer a primary concern for the majority of individuals when burying life partners and family members.

So, Liberal and National Party senators and members of parliament – why on earth are you creating such a hypocritical fuss over revisiting the federal Marriage Act again and including same-sex, transgender etc. couples in the definition of marriage and why are you considering giving people professing a religion and rabid homophobes the right to discriminate against LGBTIQ couples who may seek to marry in the future?

It was the Australian Parliament which narrowed the Marriage Act in 2004 and it is up to this 45th parliament to correct that mistake.

Faith-based institutions involved in 62 per cent of sexual abuse allegations reported to Royal Commission in private session

Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, 13 September 2016:

PUBLIC HEARING INTO THE RESPONSE OF CATHOLIC CHURCH AUTHORITIES

TO ALLEGATIONS OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE BY JOHN JOSEPH FARRELL

CASE STUDY 44

The Hon Justice Peter McClellan AM

Chair, Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse

OPENING REMARKS

It is now almost three years since the Commission held it first public hearing. In that time we have been able to complete the hearings and provide reports to the Governor-General and Governors in 26 case studies. Twenty two of those reports have been publicly released and four await publication by government. A further 13 case studies have been conducted and are at various stages of completion. Reports in those case studies will be provided to government in due course.

I have previously indicated that it is not possible for the Royal Commission to conduct a public hearing in relation to every institution about which we have received allegations of the sexual abuse of children. The Commission has received information about over 4,000 institutions. Because of the impossibility of conducting a public hearing in relation to each of these institutions we have carefully selected the institutions we have publicly investigated with a view to providing the government, the institutions and the public with an understanding of the nature of the problems which we have identified. The case studies have been selected to ensure an appropriate geographical spread and also an appropriate reflection of the type of institution where survivors were abused.

A breakdown of the institutions examined in our public hearings reveals the following. 29 case studies have examined at least one state institution (70% of all case studies). In 11 case studies state institutions were examined as a primary institution. Faith based institutions have been examined in 26 of our case studies (63% of all case studies). Catholic institutions have been examined in 14 case studies (34% of all case studies) and Anglican institutions have been examined in 5 case studies (12% of all case studies).

Today we commence a further hearing in relation to issues in the Catholic Church in NSW. This will be our last hearing dealing with Catholic institutions apart from the final review hearing which will occur next year.

As you will be aware the Commission is closing registrations for private sessions on 30 September this year. The Commissioners have now met with survivors in 5,866 private sessions and a further 1,616 people have been approved for a private session. We expect that by the time the Commission completes its work at the end of next year we will have held more than 7,200 private sessions.

The current breakdown of institutions in which survivors in private sessions state that they have been abused is as follows. 62% of attendees reported abuse in a faith-based institution. Around 27% reported abuse at government-run institutions. Abuse in Catholic institutions was reported by 40% of all private session attendees, abuse in Anglican institutions by 8% of attendees and abuse in Salvation Army institutions by 4% of attendees.

Apart from our work in public hearings and private sessions we have commissioned research across a broad range of issues relevant to the sexual abuse of children in an institutional context. The primary focus of our research has been to identify and document the changes that should be made to the way institutions are structured and governed to ensure so far as possible that children are not abused in the future. As required by our terms of reference we have also been concerned to ensure that the need for a redress response has been considered together with the response of the civil and criminal justice systems to allegations of the abuse of children. We have already published 27 research reports and a further 34 will be published in the near future. Apart from providing a valuable resource for the Commission these reports will be an authoritative source for other research and policy work long after the Commission has completed its final report.

I have previously mentioned that the Commission has worked co-operatively with police. Section 6P of the Royal Commissions Act 1902 authorises a Royal Commission to provide information to the police with respect to possible criminal offences. The Royal Commission has now referred 1,659 matters to police to consider for further investigation with a view to prosecution. Because of the volume of references the resources of the various police forces have been placed under significant pressure. Although I understand a great many references are awaiting investigation. So far prosecutions have been brought against 71 people.

After the present case study has been completed the Commission will turn its attention in a public hearing to harmful sexual behaviours of children within schools. There may be a limited number of future case studies. These will be followed by a series of review hearings in relation to various institutions and selected topics. I anticipate that our final hearing which has been given the working title ‘Nature, Cause and Impact of Child Sexual Abuse’ will focus amongst other matters on the ‘why’ question, and will take place in March 2017.

The new face of local government in the Northern Rivers region of NSW

Now the final votes have been counted the new face of local government in the Northern Rivers region is revealed (with the exception of Tweed Shire LGA).

The political parties listed against councillor names are those included in final results published by the NSW Electoral Commission and do not necessarily represent the full range of political persuasions on any given council, as many councillors belong to political parties but chose not to stand for election with an official endorsement.

Ballina Shire Council:

Phil Meehan, Stephen McCarthy, Nathan Willis, Jeff Johnson, Sharon Cadwallader, Keith Williams, Ben Smith, Eoin Johnston and Sharon Parry.

Byron Shire Council:

Michael Lyon (THE GREENS), Paul Spooner (COUNTRY LABOR), Jeanette Martin (THE GREENS), Sarah Ndiaye (THE GREENS), Basil Cameron (OUR SUSTAINABLE FUTURE), Alan Hunter, Jan Hackett (COUNTRY LABOR) and Kate Coorey.

Clarence Valley Council:

Richie Williamson, Andrew Baker, Karen Toms, Peter Ellem, Jason Kingsley, Debrah Novak,Jim Simmons,  Arthur Lysaught and Greg Clancy.

Kyogle Council:

Kylie Thomas, Hayden Doolan, Janet Wilson, John Burley, Bob Dwyer, Maggie May, Danielle Mulholland, Lindsay Passfield and Earle Grundy.

Lismore City Council:

Darlene Cook (COUNTRY LABOR), Greg Bennett, Neil Marks, Vanessa Grindon-Ekins (THE GREENS), Edwina Lloyd (COUNTRY LABOR), Nancy Zambelli-Casson, Elly Bird (OUR SUSTAINABLE FUTURE), Bill Moorhouse, Gianpiero Battista, Adam Guise (THE GREENS).

Richmond Valley Council:

Steve Morrissey, Daniel Simpson, Sandra Duncan-Humphrys, Robert Hayes, Sam Cornish and Jill Lyons.

Tweed Shire Council:

Deferred Election. A new election will be held on 29 October 2016 due to the death of a candidate.

Quote of the Week

This is certainly one of the nastiest election campaign I have been involved in, and I have worked in quite a few since 1973.

[Ian Saunders, Independent candidate, 2016 Clarence Valley local government elections, writing on Clarence Valley Rate Payers, Residents & Business Owners Facebook page on 6 September 2016]