Bendigo inquest continues into death of child in state care

A girl who died while in the care of the state had effectively never seen her siblings again after her removal from the family home a coronial inquest has heard.

The Coroner's Court heard the 17-year-old XY (a pseudonym) had not had a formally-organised meeting with the siblings she dearly loved and cared for in a "mothering role" in the four years before her passing.

This was despite many chances for the Department of Families, Fairness and Housing to facilitate such visits.

In her short life, XY had allegedly been victim of a number of incidents of physical and sexual abuse. One of the perpetrators of this sexual abuse, she alleged, was her non-Indigenous step-father.

READ MORE:

Dr BJ Newton and Dr Jacynta Krakouer formed the expert Aboriginal panel advising Coroner Simon McGregor, and agreed with his summation that the department's actions leading up to XY's passing by suicide were "too little, too late".

The court room was decorated with Indigenous cultural artefacts - a coolamon used for carrying babies, an emu egg, a possum skin rug and a kangaroo skin decorated artwork - as the inquest looked into what lessons could be learned to prevent another preventable death.

Dr Newton is a Wiradjuri woman with a PhD in social work and policy from UNSW while Dr Krakouer is a Mineng Noongar woman with a PhD in social work from the University of Melbourne.

Dr Newton told the court when XY was removed from her family home her "purpose" and "identity" had been taken away from her, before she read an emotional letter XY had sent to her mother.

In it, the young girl said she had found it "incredibly hard" to be away from her siblings for so long.

MORE STORIES:

While she said she knew she couldn't see them every day, she asked if she could see them at "the park at the weekend, or visiting while at nan's?"

"It really hurts me that I can't play my role as a big sister."

XY believed, and had been told, the decision rested on her mother but the court heard there had been multiple opportunities for DFFH to help organise catch-ups between siblings despite times when there were disagreement with the parents.

"It ate (her) up - and nobody listened," an emotional Dr Newton told the court.

She later said it was "not rocket science" to ask someone what they wanted, to consider what was in their best interests and to not make paternalistic decisions for others.

The expert panel also unpacked the "double standard" that saw XY unable to see her siblings for four years, while XY's step-father who she accused of sexual abuse, was able to see his family just six weeks after being removed from the family home.

After seven placements, XY ultimately decided to live in residential care because she "did not want to go through the abandonment".

Dr Krakouer told the court the context of "ongoing legacies of trauma and colonial oppression" should be remembered when examining this young girl's story.

She and Dr Newton will continue to provide their feedback to the inquest but on the second day they spoke to points including cultural safety, engagement opportunities and the need for longer-term strategic thinking.

Earlier completion of an Aboriginal family-led decision making (AFLDM) meeting and a cultural plan was recommended.

The court heard, in the case of XY, an AFLDM was not done until 18 months after her removal and only two family members were present after some relationship breakdowns.

READ MORE:

The Yoorrook Justice Commission has broadly recommended that an AFLDM be done before a child is removed, while the experts told the court that policy states it should occur within 21 days from substantiation.

The panel also told the court there had been a delay in the delivery of a cultural plan which was meant to occur within 16 weeks. Once created, XY's cultural plan was described as "quickly out of date" and lacking milestone dates and names of people who would be accountable for milestones.

The court heard DFFH could have more effectively worked with XY's family throughout their dealings.

One example of advice was that DFFH could have worked with her family, alongside other cultural supports, on a culturally aware way to address XY's sexual sexual allegations - some of which related to her step-father.

The court heard the process carried out contributed to XY being "ostracised" by some relatives.

The expert panel were clear that XY wanted and needed sibling contact.

They also spoke of the need for longer-term thinking instead of crisis-based social work looking for placements at the last minute which caused XY distress.

The experts said that cultural engagement could be done both through contact with other people and other means.

They said people were "conduits of culture" that provided more immersive experiences of culture than books or TV, for example, but noted there were other ways XY could have been assisted to engage with her culture. Examples were having representations of her totem in her room or a smoking ceremony to make her feel more safe.

The court heard the Bendigo and District Aboriginal Cooperative had felt their culture expertise was misunderstood.

The panel also suggested that there should be alternatives to involving police with incidents of self-harm and the involvement of female and Aboriginal police officers where possible - particularly when XY was disclosing instances of sexual violence.

OTHER NEWS:

The panel also referenced evidence from the Taskforce 1000 "Always was, always will be" 2016 report highlighting that cultural services were better implemented by Aboriginal run organisations compared to those not created with First Nations expertise.

There was also discussion about how workers within the system were "overburdened" and other groups that could offer assistance - particularly Indigenous groups such as BDAC - were not resourced enough.

More discussion areas included a broader understanding of Aboriginal Child Placement Principals beyond placement discussions and looking at prevention and partnership, and the "power imbalance" in interactions between DFFH and Aboriginal families.

The panel said there was an inability to "divorce the best interests of a child from the best interests of a community" when assisting Aboriginal families.

After the completion of Dr Krakouer and Dr Newton's evidence, two other expert panels will offer their expertise on the lessons to be learned from the passing of XY.

The inquest continues.

If you or someone needs support, contact:

Digital subscribers now have the convenience of faster news, right at your fingertips with the Bendigo Advertiser app. Click here to download