Stolen babies - broken hearts : forced adoption in Australia 1881-1987

Abstract

A hidden history of government intervention into the lives of unwed, white mothers is beginning to emerge. Most Australians are unaware that thousands of white babies were forcibly taken under a policy of assimilation during the 20th Century. This research project has attempted to explain this phenomenon by contextualising it within an historical account of 'child removalist' polices that were imported into Australia with British settlement. It also makes a linkage between the British treatment of its destitute, unwed mothers under the Poor Laws, the forced removal of their children and Forced Adoption/white stolen children in 20th Century Australia. From the beginning of colonial history motherhood has been constructed by the structures of patriarchy and capitalism imported along with the rigid, hierarchal legal system of Britain, and the ideology that underpinned it. In the 1800s the babies of convict mothers were taken and placed in Orphan Asylums, whilst they were sent back to work. During the late 19th century unsupported, unwed mothers had their babies forcibly taken and fostered out to country areas in order to be separated from their 'contaminating' influence and that of their 'pauper' families. Hence the beginning of the child welfare system was grounded in child removal practices, not in supporting vulnerable families stay together. By the early 1900s, a population policy moulded by two forces: eugenics and pronatalism had emerged. It was directed by the Commonwealth and enacted by State institutions. Its particular focus was to populate Australia with 'good white stock': legitimately born white infants, who could be called upon to defend the Empire. White Australians were not considered a homogenous grouping, but a continuum that ranged between the 'racially superior' elite and 'racially inferior' 'degenerates'. The latter category included white, unwed mothers and their infants. Illegitimacy was seen as a threat to 'race improvement', and presumed to be the root of racial decay. It was assumed that if children were removed and assimilated with white, married, employed couples, their tainted biology would be neutralised. It was also a measure to expand the white, middle and upper classes. A little known fact is that there was resistance to the forced removal/assimilation policy at a grass roots level and that the majority of white unmarried mothers kept their infants. Therefore this research project hypothesised that there were two discourses that regulated the lives of unwed mothers. Mothers who had their infants taken were exposed to an institutional discourse that was comprised of motherhood, medical and eugenic discourses, imported from the 'mother country' and the United States. They were articulated through maternal and infant welfare representatives and their practices which included Forced Adoption. At the same time a lay discourse that had co-existed for hundreds of years was also imported. This was expressed in the language, the practices and the support given to daughters and grandchildren by their kin and was a backlash against the autocratic State practice of forced removal. The discourse that framed the mother's pregnancy and birth experience determined whether or not she kept her infant or had it taken for adoption. Both discourses were grounded in patriarchy as the mother who kept had the protection and support of her patriarchal structured family. The unsupported unwed mother stood outside the norms of what was considered right and proper by the social work and medical elite. Her pregnant body challenged the power structure on which patriarchy rests: control of the reproductive labour of women. The language used for the justification of forced removals has evolved over the centuries. The 18th century 'pauper' was 'vicious' and wanted to rid herself of her burden, the 19th century feebleminded mother was incapable of providing a 'moral' environment. The rise of Freudian based social casework theory that dominated social work in Australia (1940-1970s) labelled her as too 'immature and neurotic' to rear her 'unwanted' infant. It was considered to be in 'its best interest' to be removed and placed with a 'normal family' with a 'real' mother and father. Unsupported, unwed white mothers did not have the same maternal rights as their married counterparts. They did not have access to their rights of citizenship, which led to major violations of their human and civil rights. The most brutal, being separated from their newborns at birth.

Date of Award	2013
Original language	English