Kids institutionalised abroad - What's this about?

"But I do think this country bends over backwards for children, in ways that other countries do not. "

Hi Aaron, I'm wondering, such as?I have heard the phrase "the cult of the child" being used and I don't see it myself.

 

I think I probably made it up myself. But it applies to people who assume because you don't have children you are at best missing out on something wonderful and at worse, being incredibly selfish (why??). I've had this said to me and I have other (childless) friends who have heard the same.

 

As most on here know, I became a dad nearly a year ago, and it is great (though hard work). That's probably why many people tell you you're missing out. However it is a choice. Some people just don't want kids and that's fair enough. I personally think it would be very, very wrong to try to persuade someone to have kids, because kids aren't possessions to have as some sort of status symbol, and your life does change quite drastically and there's nothing you can do about that, so trying to persuade someone to have kids is meddling in their lives a bit too much I reckon.

I don't know why someone think it was selfish not to want kids. The flip side of that is perhaps that it is selfish to have kids. The kids don't decide to be born, we bring them into the world because we want to, and the world we bring them into isn't necessarily nice.

 

OK so the debate moves on, .

But getting back to the Aussie connection.

Sure the kids were told they were going to a better life and I'm sure many did.

But no-way will they say so now its all blown up.

Main reason, there might just be a bit of compensation from either the Aussie government or the UK, and to say now that things were not really so bad for any particular individual, would be waving goodbye to it.
And you cant blame them.

I agree, we should not as a nation keep saying sorry to who ever, for all the dirty deeds that this country has done over the years.
They were done in a different age, and time.

 

From what I have read this policy was instituted after WWII when Britain was financially and mentally bankrupt. Australia was booming by comparison but in dire need of population and workers (of all sorts). Many of these kids would have come from areas of incredible deprivation, areas that were riddled with poverty, areas that had been bombed and devastated during the war. Going to Australia would have been seen as a real step up for them, and for many it was. The Ten Pound Pommies suffered great hardships (my great uncle was one of them in the 1950's from Ireland) but the ones who persevered are now a great deal better off than they possibly would have been had they stayed here.

I still think this news has been blown out of all proportion, enhanced by our wonderful and narrow minded media and the absurd apology of Gordon Brown (the apology by the Australian PM is perhaps slightly more relevant, but maybe it should be extended to the racism the Pommies received when they arrived).

As Pete says, a different age and time. Admit it happened, but leave off with the flagellation. Ultimately, it does the public pysche no good whatsoever.

 

hi all, just been reading a piece about the child migrant programs. they started in 1618 and went on to 1967.after 1920 most of them, from britain went to australia. after ww11 with the close shave of the japanese invasion of australia, inspired an australian national motto.
"populate or perish". what i have been reading is a lot of these kids where unwanted,came from so called care homes .a lot of them had been abandoned by there so called parents. a lot of these kids were starving in our country and throughout europe .a lot of these kids did better in australia than they would have here .

 

Ah, thanks Aaron, I wasn't sure what you meant. And I agree with you, it isn't selfish to choose to have no children, it is wise and a heck of a lot less expensive and stressful. It is easy when they are very small and you know where they are, they are safe and they do lovely cute things etc etc-when they are teenagers things change. Next time round I won't be having them.

As far as an apology, well when I was being brought up I was taught that if you do something bad to someone you say sorry and try to make up for it, simplistic perhaps. Time does not heal all wounds. It was wrong, and it was sanctioned by the Britain and Australia, I don't see the problem with an apology, it is the right thing to do.

 

Nothing wrong with saying sorry, but as this happened within living memory, it's very possible those who had the idea and carried it out are still alive. Perhaps they should be giving the apology and explain their reasons. I have no love for Gordon Brown but as I said before, he wasn't in power (or even born?) then so why does he have to do the apologies. Collective guilt does no one any good, let alone a whole country. We have enough problems here, without giving ourselves more!

 

Thanks Shiney. That's what I was after when I started this thread. I was looking for an unbiased perspective of what it was all about, because I know the media are incapble of being objective and unbiased.

So it seems that in the majority of cases, this was a good thing, but as is so often the case, there were abuses in a minority of cases.

If I've summed that up correctly, then as far as I'm concerned, all that remains to be done is for those that abused their position, or knew about abuse and turned a blind eye, should own up if they are still about. Due legal process should then be followed to hold the abusers to account.

I don't see much point in Gordon Brown appologising though. As far as I'm concerned it would mean nothingbecause he didn't do it. Besides, if it was a generally good scheme but with a minority of abuses, and he has to appologise about the scheme in general, then surely he should also appologise to everyone who ever went to school or was taken into care in Britain, as abuses go on in just about every institution.

 

Surely the reason Gordon Brown is apologising is because he is doing it on behalf of the country.

No way is it a personal apology and neither should it be.

The issue is that in this day and age, once you make an apology you are admitting you did something wrong.
Admit you did something wrong and you get sued, in this case big time.

So we the tax payers are very likely to have to foot the bill.
And as I dont, personally, feel responsible either, I hope it doesn't cost me, personally, any money.

But if it just turns out to be a "sorry it was wrong" full stop, then I have no problem with it.

 

Flipping heck, I don't read newspapers or watch the news much but the little I had seen I thought was back to the WW2 era. Can't believe it was happening in the '60s even! Again, I would love to know the truth not the media stuff. I'm sure it was horrendous for the many that suffered but what about the kids that did benefit? Were there any? No excuse for any illtreatment.

Look at what's happening now in many countries, not so much better for many kids or adults!

If I had a magic wand.......

cheers