Evaluation of the Bringing them home and Indigenous mental health programs

9.1 The Link-Up Program

Up to Bringing Them Home

prev pageprev page| TOC |next page

9.1.1 Access to records

One of the key challenges for the Link-Up services relates to accessing records. To undertake their work, Link-Up workers need to search for records held both by:

• Government agencies, including at both a State and (in the case of NT and ACT) Commonwealth level. These agencies include those with responsibility for child protection, community services, archives and records (eg AIATSIS, Births, Deaths and Marriages, government libraries, the Koorie Heritage Trust and Koorie Family History Service in Victoria, public records offices, immigration departments etc).
• Non-government agencies, such as churches and schools.

As many Link-Up clients no longer reside in the State in which they were first removed, Link-Up services are often required to conduct searches across State/Territory jurisdictions. Many Link-Up services also reported that there has been an increasing necessity to conduct international searches for clients based overseas or clients living in Australia wanting to locate family members living overseas.
Some of the barriers experienced by services in relation to accessing records include:

• the costs of accessing and copying records for clients
• Link-Up services in regional areas reported that it is very costly and time-consuming to regularly travel to the capital city in their State to access records.

Link-Up workers in a number of States/ Territories are said to experience considerable resistance from State Government agencies as they seek to access relevant records on behalf of clients. Legislation in each State affects the extent to which workers can acquire the right information, and in many cases the heavy censorship of government-held records affects their ability to trace family members (this is also the case with some church-based organisations.) It was also reported that there can sometimes be major delays in receiving the records requested.

A critical factor which appears to influence the ease, efficiency and cost of accessing records from government and non-government organisations is the establishment of formal protocols between Link-Up organisations and the relevant agencies. This has occurred in some jurisdictions but not others. For example, Nunkuwarrin Yunti’s Link-Up service has developed MoU’s with all the major government and non-government agencies holding records in SA. Similarly in the NT a protocol has been developed between the Link-Up services and the NT Government (the Protocol for Access to NT Government Records by Aboriginal People Researching their Families). Protocols have been beneficial in providing, in some instances, standard processes for accessing records, priority access for Link-Up clients, and discounted or waived fees associated with accessing and copying records.
Top of page
In jurisdictions with no or less comprehensive protocols, such as WA, Link-Up services report that access to records is much more time-consuming and difficult.

Link-Up services reported that access to records held by non-government agencies was particularly challenging. There are fewer protocols in existence in relation to non-government agencies. As noted by the previous MCATSIA (2003, p19) evaluation, such agencies in some jurisdictions can be reluctant to release records due to fear of litigation and high monetary costs.

Those consulted felt there was a need for protocols to be established in all jurisdictions with all relevant government and non-government agencies to facilitate better access by Link-Ups to client and family information. (It was suggested that OATSIH would be well-placed to take a lead role in this process).

As noted in chapter 9, it was reported that some record-searching/keeping agencies have found that Link-Up staff do not make the most effective use of AIATSIS’s enquiry service and in turn accessing record agencies. This indicates that Link-Up staff could benefit from greater levels of skills and/or training in this issue.

There is also a back-log in enquiries to AIATSIS, and while the service prioritises requests by Link-Up services, there can be an 18 month delay in responding to requests from other sources.

In addition as noted in chapter 7, some BTH services with poor liaison with Link-Up are conducting some of Link-Up’s role in searching records themselves, which is beyond the scope of the program.

While the Australian Government invested resources in improving access to records in its first round of BTH funding, there are still clearly some improvements required in this area.

Another issue raised is that establishing proof of Aboriginality is beyond Link-Up’s formal role, but both Link-Ups and (in some instances) BTH services are assisting clients with this issue. Establishing this proof may be critical for Aboriginal people, because otherwise they cannot access some Aboriginal services (including Link-Up). The Commonwealth test for establishing proof of Aboriginality requires that three criteria be satisfied: the person has Aboriginal heritage, identifies him/herself as an Aboriginal person, and is accepted by the Aboriginal community in which s/he lives. Establishing these criteria can be particularly difficult for Stolen Generations members – for instance, because they may not be known or recognised as Aboriginal by their communities. Some Link-Up and BTH services also reported that if they could not establish their Aboriginality, some Stolen Generations members were reluctant to seek assistance with their needs arising from this, or to access other Aboriginal programs for fear of backlash from the Aboriginal community. Thus, even though establishing proof of Aboriginality is beyond the official Link-Up role, it appears to be an important function for them to continue to fulfil. It may also be a by-product of Link-Ups tracing Aboriginal family members from whom clients have been separated.

prev pageprev page| TOC |next page