Introduction

First Nations¹ children are 11 times more likely to be placed in out-of-home care than non-Indigenous children (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare [AIHW], 2024; Yoorrook Justice Commission, 2023), and this inequality has been steadily increasing over several decades (Long & Sephton, 2011). This over-representation of First Nations children in the Australian child protection system has led researchers, practitioners and communities to call for improved cultural safety in social and health-related services and systems (Baidawi et al., 2017).

The child protection system aims to support young people at risk of harm in situations where families are unable to protect them (Department of Families, Fairness and Housing, 2022). However, when a First Nations child is removed from their family and community, there are significant negative impacts on their development, including a diminished ability to form cultural connections and drastically reduced opportunities to learn and practice cultural beliefs and traditions that sustain wellbeing (Day et al., 2017; Dudgeon et al., 2014). 

As a consequence, there is widespread and deep-seated reluctance by First Nations peoples and families to get involved with the child protection system, especially as these adverse outcomes are reminiscent of the Australian child removal policies enacted during the Stolen Generations (Ralph & Ryan, 2017). This reluctance is intensified by experiences of racism, discrimination and a lack of culturally safe interactions in the child protection system and other areas such as the health system (Liddle et al., 2022; Nolan-Isles et al., 2021; White, 2023). It is in this context that First Nations peoples and communities are calling for more cultural safety in the child protection system (Flemington et al., 2021; Long & Sephton, 2011; McGough et al., 2018).

This article incorporates the findings of 2 qualitative research projects conducted in 2023. One project focused on the experiences of First Nations peoples with child protection practice (McVicar, 2023), and the second project investigated how non-Indigenous psychologists use cultural safety when working with First Nations clients (White, 2023). Based on the findings of these 2 projects, this article aims to provide guidance on how practitioners can adapt their practice to create a more culturally safe environment for First Nations peoples.

What is cultural safety?

SNAICC defines cultural safety for First Nations children as ‘the child being provided with a safe, nurturing and positive environment where they are comfortable with being themselves, expressing their culture … their spiritual and belief systems, and they are supported by the carer … (who) respects their Aboriginality and therefore encourages their sense of self and identity.’ (National Office for Child Safety [NOCS] et al., 2021, p 7). It also includes upholding the rights of First Nations children to:

• identify as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander without fear of retribution or questioning
• receive an education that strengthens their culture and identity
• maintain connection to their land and Country
• maintain their strong kinship ties and social obligations
• be taught their cultural heritage by their Elders
• receive information in a culturally sensitive, relevant and accessible manner
• be involved in services that are culturally respectful (NOCS et al., 2021).

Improving the cultural safety of a service or system requires an improvement of the service itself and a reduction of the barriers that discourage First Nations peoples and families from using those services in the first place (White, 2023). In the child protection system, many child protection assessment procedures ignore and misunderstand First Nations cultural and parenting practices, despite government efforts to increase cultural awareness (Carey et al., 2017; McVicar, 2023). Additionally, First Nations peoples and families are often reluctant to engage with related government services. 

To do the work to implement cultural safety, practitioners must first acknowledge the widespread influence of Australia’s settler-colonial context as it affects both personal and service values. For child protection practitioners, cultural safety means ensuring respect for all cultural and social differences, so that services are accessible, responsive and free of racism (Department of Health, 2023; Milroy et al., 2023). Cultural safety principles can be used to centre ‘the positive aspects of First Nations culture’ and knowledge, while ‘creating a sense of meaning and purpose for your Aboriginal clients’ (Frankland et al., 2011, p 27). With a strong commitment to the ongoing learning journey of implementing cultural safety, a practitioner will be able to improve their services by providing safe, appropriate and respectful care as determined by First Nations clients. 

Cultural safety practice principles 

This article focuses on 3 key evidence-informed practice principles that can be used to improve cultural safety for First Nations peoples within the child protection system. 

• Principle 1: Cultural safety is everyone’s responsibility.
• Principle 2: View culture as a strength.
• Principle 3: Prioritise relationships and community. 

These principles are discussed in more detail below. They are also applicable to other health and social service areas.

Principle 1: Cultural safety is everyone’s responsibility

In 2023, First Nations children comprised approximately 6% of the general Australian population aged 0–17 years (Productivity Commission, 2024). However, 43.7% of children aged 0–17 years in out-of-home care identified as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander (Productivity Commission, 2024). This discrepancy is problematic, especially when considering that most practitioners working with First Nations children and families are non-Indigenous.

For services to meet the needs of First Nations peoples involved in the child protection system, all non-Indigenous workers have a key responsibility to educate themselves on cultural safety and commit to improving cultural safety in their practice (Taylor & Guerin, 2019; White, 2023). This can then lead to widespread change and better outcomes for First Nations children and families.

Practitioner self-education on cultural safety can include learning about respect for others’ cultures and using appropriate cross-cultural communication (Taylor & Guerin, 2019). An essential element of culturally safe practice is 'cultural humility', defined as an ongoing process of self-reflection, looking at your own biases and considering how your views impact interactions with others (Dudgeon & Walker, 2015; Dudgeon et al., 2021). This process includes questioning your own world view, acknowledging the historical treatment of Indigenous peoples, and recognising the ongoing influence of colonisation (Dudgeon et al., 2021; West et al., 2022).

You may find the questions above confronting at first – especially if you have never questioned your beliefs and attitudes before – but this is an essential first step in educating yourself. In this sense, developing cultural humility requires us to be open and vulnerable. This process can be very uncomfortable, yet ultimately a critical part of the learning journey. 

In workplaces that do not have adequate cultural safety and cultural awareness training, we encourage you to take the initiative and begin your ongoing learning journey yourself. (The CFCA resource sheet Resources to support culturally safe service delivery to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples provides a guide to resources that can help you.

Principle 2: View culture as a strength

Our research findings indicate that early career practitioners, in particular, may avoid talking about culture in conversations with First Nations people to avoid being perceived as racist, unknowledgeable or unprepared (White, 2023). Practitioners in White’s study initially thought it was more appropriate to avoid talking about culture or race but soon realised that acknowledging cultural background is a great way to strengthen connections to culture (Murrup-Stewart et al., 2021a). Practitioners also discovered that First Nations peoples genuinely appreciated the intention and effort to acknowledge culture, even if the practitioner was early on in their learning journey (White, 2023). Being deliberately ignorant of First Nations culture can contribute to the systemic silencing and removal of First Nations peoples’ voices and needs.

First Nations peoples are the longest and strongest continuing culture in the world (Pascoe, 2018). This is a testament to First Nations’ health, wellbeing and healing practices for each other and Country (Hovane et al., 2014). As a result, the knowledge base of First Nations societies is immensely valuable. 

Understanding and utilising the wisdom of First Nations societies – which precedes Western knowledge – can be beneficial to your clients and your own practice (Dudgeon et al., 2021). For example, if you work in health care and engage a First Nations client, providing your client with the opportunity to express their connections with land, spirit, family and kin will allow them to feel comfortable when receiving your service. They may also need support to pursue these connections further, through encouragement or referrals to appropriate First Nations organisations. 

Similarly, if you work in the social and community services sector, collaborating and working with First Nations community members and/or Elders will strengthen your client’s feelings of belonging and provide them with a sense of community – both essential to strong wellbeing. The benefits of embracing connections to culture might be difficult to see for non-Indigenous people but the benefits are undeniable for First Nations peoples.

Beware the ‘deficit lens’

When learning to view culture as a strength, it is important to understand the lens in which you view the world. In Australian society, many non-Indigenous people learn to view First Nations peoples through what is often referred to as a ‘deficit lens’ (Fogarty et al., 2018). A deficit lens is a perspective that frames the qualities of a person, community or culture as negative or unwanted, such that the person, community or culture is viewed as problematic (Fogarty et al, 2018). 

Our research revealed some telling examples of this within the child protection system. For example, it is common for First Nations families to have an extensive support system with family, friends, aunties, uncles and grandparents to help look after their children (McVicar, 2023). This is a major strength of community; however, it is often misinterpreted by non-Indigenous child protection practitioners as evidence that the parents were unable to raise the children on their own. 

Imposing Western paradigms on First Nations families can be detrimental to communities who uphold traditional belief systems. Instead of looking at First Nations communities through a deficit lens, we should be promoting culture and trying to expand our world view to incorporate other ways of being, doing and knowing (Henderson & Navarro, 2020).

Principle 3: Prioritise relationships and community

To First Nations peoples, their relationships with family and community are a big part of who they are (Murrup-Stewart et al., 2021b). This is why First Nations peoples often include the name of their community when they introduce themselves. By referencing their family and community, they signify their identity, heritage and social and cultural roles within the community. Connection to community is also a large component of First Nations peoples’ social and emotional wellbeing (Gee et al., 2014). When First Nations peoples are connected to their community, they are less likely to struggle with mental health issues (Gee et al., 2014).

During the Stolen Generations, thousands of First Nations children were taken away from their families and communities, placed in institutions and adopted or fostered by non-Indigenous families (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, n.d.). This was extremely traumatic and many First Nations peoples alive today have close family members who were removed during the Stolen Generations. This often makes it difficult for First Nations communities to trust governments and institutions – such as the child protection system – with no assurance their children will not be subject to the same fate as their ancestors.

However, there are ways that practitioners can build trust with First Nations peoples and their communities (Henderson & Navarro, 2020). Our research has shown that when practitioners demonstrate a willingness and commitment to creating relationships with communities, First Nations peoples are more likely to trust them (McVicar, 2023). Getting to know the family and community of the First Nations person that you are working with shows them that you understand the importance of community and you care about their family as well as the individual. 

When practitioners demonstrate cultural safety (i.e. create a culturally safe environment and build respectful relationships) and develop a sense of trust with the First Nations client and community, they are more likely to provide effective services that are appropriate and aligned with the needs of the client (Henderson & Navarro, 2020). This is likely to lead to more rewarding and positive outcomes in their work, such as reunification (Yoorrook Justice Commission, 2023).

Conclusion

The child protection system would benefit from improved practice standards of cultural safety for First Nations peoples. Key recommendations to becoming more culturally safe include taking responsibility for cultural safety, viewing culture as a strength and prioritising relationships and community. 

Bridging the gap between cultural safety and the current standard of practice is an ongoing collaborative journey for practitioners and services. Through implementing the recommendations of this article, non-Indigenous peoples and services can continue to contribute to transformative change for First Nations peoples. Improved practice standards of cultural safety in the Australian child protection system will contribute to improved mental health and wellbeing of First Nations peoples, children and communities.

¹For the purposes of this article, the authors have used the term ‘First Nations’ rather than ‘Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander’ because identity is currently linked to individual tribal names and First Nations is becoming the preferred group identifier as it is inclusive of all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.