Universal Declaration of Human Rights

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf

Preamble

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and

inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the
foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,
Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in
barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of
mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall
enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want
has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common
people,
Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have
recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and
oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of
law,
Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly
relations between nations,
Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter
reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and
worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and
women and have determined to promote social progress and better
standards of life in larger freedom,
Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in
cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal
respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental
freedoms,
Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is
of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,
Now, therefore, The General Assembly, Proclaims this Universal
Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of
achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every
individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration
constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to
promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive
measures, national and international, to secure their universal and
effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of
Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories
under their jurisdiction.

Article I
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They
are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards
one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this
Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour,
sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status.
Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the
political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or
territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent,
trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of
sovereignty.

Article 3
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave
trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person
before the law.

Article 7
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any
discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal
protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration
and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent
national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted
him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an
independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights
and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11
1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be
presumed innocent until proved guilty according tolaw in a public
trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his
defence.
2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of
any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under
national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor
shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable
at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy,
family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour
and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law
against such interference or attacks.

Article 13
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence
within the borders of each State.
2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own,
and to return to his country.

Article 14
1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries
asylum from persecution.
2. This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions
genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to
the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15
1. Everyone has the right to a nationality.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied
the right to change his nationality.

Article 16
1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race,
nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family.
They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage
and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent
of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society
and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Article 17
1. Everyone has the right to own propertyalone as well as in
association with others.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and
religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief,
and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public
or private, to manifest this religion or belief in teaching, practice,
worship and observance.

Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this
right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to
seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media
and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20
1. Everyone has the right to freedom ofpeaceful assembly and
association.
2. No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Article 21
1. Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his
country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
2. Everyone has the right to equal access to public service in his
country.
3. The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of
government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine
elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall
be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Article 22
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security
and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international
co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resour
ces of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights
indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his
personality.
Article 23
1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to
just and favourable conditions of work and toprotection against
unemployment.
2. Everyone, without any discrimination,has the right to equal pay
for equal work.
3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable
remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence
worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other
means of social protection.
4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the
protection of his interests.
Article 24
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable
limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
Article 25
1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the
health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food,
clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services,
and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness,
disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in
circumstances beyond his control.
2. Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and
assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall
enjoy the same social protection.
Article 26
1. Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at
least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary
education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional
education shall be made generally available and higher education
shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
2. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human
personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance
and friendship among all nations, racial orreligious groups, and
shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance
of peace.
3. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that
shall be given to their children.
Article 27
1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of
the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific
advancement and its benefits.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material
interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of
which he is the author.
Article 28
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the
rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully
realized.
Article 29
1. Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free
and full development of his personality is possible.
2. In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be
subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for
the purpose of securing due recognition and respect
for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just
requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a
democratic society.
3. These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary
to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 30
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any
State, group or person any right to engage in any activity
or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights
and freedoms set forth herein.
Academic journal article Social Work

Human Rights and Social Work

By Witkin, Stanley L.
Read preview
https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-20748786/human-rights-and-social-work

Article excerpt
[The] recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all
members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.

- United Nations, 1948

So begins the preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the first multinational
agreement specifying basic rights to which all people are entitled. This year marks the 50th
anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration by the United Nations General
Assembly. For social workers, this anniversary provides an opportunity to reflect on the
meaning and significance of human rights for their work.

In the aftermath of the horrors of World War II, the international community was motivated
to make a statement and adopt a platform that would express their collective repugnance at
these atrocities and to forge an agreement that might prevent such tragedies in the future.
Under the leadership of Eleanor Roosevelt and with considerable urging and support from
nongovernment organizations, the United Nations convened representatives of various
member states to draft a document that would enumerate the rights and freedoms of all
people. After three years of work, revisions, and debates - the final one lasting until the call
for a predawn vote - the Declaration was adopted without dissent on December 10, 1948
(National Coordinating Committee for UDHR50, 1998).

In the 50 years since its adoption, and despite several other agreements and covenants, the
world has seen, and continues to see, numerous new offenses inflicted on humanity. Yet
despite its inability to eliminate abuses to life and basic dignities, the Declaration remains a
significant document. Its articulation of the idea of universal rights, its recognition that such
rights cannot be divorced from social and economic arrangements (Gil, 1994), and its
inclusion of human rights in international discourse have had a beneficial impact on the lives
of countless people.

The precepts and values embedded in the Declaration are familiar and central to our
professional identity. They include "existential" statements about humanity, such as "All
human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." They include "positive rights"
such as the right to life, liberty, and security of person; to recognition as a person before the
law with equal protection; to a nationality; to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion
and "negative rights" such as protection from slavery or servitude, arbitrary arrest, detention,
or exile. They also include the economic, social, and cultural rights indispensable for dignity
and development; the right to work, including equal pay for equal work; and the right to a
standard of living adequate for health and well-being, including food, clothing, housing,
medical care, and necessary social services (United Nations Center for Human Rights, 1992).

These statements express social work's most basic values and vision for humanity, a point
well understood by our international colleagues: "Human rights are inseparable from social
work theory, values and ethics, and practice. Rights corresponding to human needs have to be
upheld and fostered, and they embody the justification and motivation for social work action.
Advocacy of such rights must therefore be an integral part of social work" (United Nations
Center for Human Rights, 1992, p. 10).

In the United States these commitments to human rights appear less visible and integrated
with social work practice and research. In my view, this is the result of our emphases on
individual change, psychological explanation, and conventional science. Our human rights
stance also is influenced by our (that is, Western) view of ourselves as the center of the
universe and the representation of good (Galtung, 1994). This perspective is reinforced by a
capitalist, political economy whose myths tend to obscure rights issues while claiming to
champion them.

But the problems that social workers confront cannot be divorced from the human rights
struggles within and beyond our borders.

Australian Human Rights Commission

The role of social workers as human rights

workers with Indigenous people and
communities
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/news/speeches/role-social-workers-human-rights-workers-
indigenous-people-and-communities

The role of social workers as human rights workers with

Indigenous people and communities
By Tom Calma, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner,
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission

Social Work Orientation Week Seminar

Australian Catholic University
12 February 2008

I would like to begin today by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land we meet on
today, the Ngunnawal people.

Thank you to the Australian Catholic University for inviting me to speak today. As you no
doubt know, I am a social worker by training , graduating in 1978, so it is wonderful to have
an opportunity to address you. It is great to see so many upcoming social workers here today,
as well as a number of you who have a wealth of experience and do so much good in our
communities. Its a tough job at the coal face. One that you often do in difficult
circumstances, with little support, not to mention little money!

Also, thank you to Christine King for her introduction. On the eve of the national apology to
the Stolen Generations from the Australian Parliament, it seems timely to pay tribute to
Christine for her tireless work as the Co-chair of the Stolen Generations Alliance. Christine,
her sister Rosie and their Mum, were all victims of forced removals so tomorrow will be a big
day for Christine and her family. Christine also provides leadership in her role as the chair of
the National Coalition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Workers. Us
Indigenous social workers are only a small group so organizations like this provide support
and guidance to help us grow strong, and attract more people to our ranks!

Sometimes working in human rights, it seems like I am surrounded by lawyers and caught up
in the big picture processes like the United Nations, legal cases and legislation. All of this is
crucially important, but sometimes it seems a long way from what I learnt at university as I
was preparing to go out into the world as a social worker. What I want to talk to you about
today is actually how close these two worlds are.

That is, social workers by very definition are human rights workers. Social workers help
individuals realise their rights everyday and are ideally placed to help communities claim
their collective rights.

Indigenous people and communities are very often social work clients. By shifting our
focus to human rights I will discuss how social workers can move towards more empowering,
rights based practice that develops individual and community capacity.

This will provide an opportunity to discuss some important areas where social workers can
play a role like: the Northern Territory intervention; more broadly how we can address family
violence and abuse in Indigenous communities; and moving beyond the apology. All of these
areas connect with human rights at a number of levels.

Social work is a profession that is built on, according to the AASWs Code of Ethics:

the pursuit and maintenance of human well-being. Social work aims to maximize the
development of human potential and the fulfillment of human needs.

The Code of Ethics goes on to state that two of the key values and principles are: human
dignity and worth; and social justice. Human dignity and worth means that social workers
respect the inherent dignity and worth of every person and respect the human rights expressed
in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Social justice encompasses the
satisfaction of basic needs; fair access to services and benefits to achieve human potential;
and recognition of individual and community rights.

These values and principles in the Code of Ethics already establish the foundations for human
rights based social work practice. They readily acknowledge human rights principles,
explicitly the Universal Declaration. But what does human rights based social work practice
look like in real life? To sketch some of these issues I will be borrowing from Professor Jim
Ife and his work on human rights and social work.[1]

Human rights are often categorised as first, second and third generations. First generation
rights are civil and political rights, like the right to vote, freedom of speech, freedom from
discrimination, fair trial etc. Second generation rights are economic, social and cultural rights,
like the right to health, housing, social security and education. Third generation rights are
collective rights, such as the right to development and self determination.

In terms of social work practice, realising first generation rights means advocacy either on
behalf of individuals or disadvantaged groups. Social workers working in advocacy might be
involved in the protection of civil and political rights through advocacy groups, refugee
action groups or prisoner reform. In relation to social work practice with Indigenous people,
the advocacy work that led to the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and
the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children
from their Families comes to mind.

Working to realise second generation rights is the bread and butter work of most social
workers. It involves putting services in place to meet rights like the right to education, health
care, housing, income and so on. So, every time a social worker takes a client to Centrelink to
assist them to get income support, or liaises with the Department of Housing to find
accommodation, or refers them to a community health centre for physical, social or emotional
support they are engaging in a form of human rights work.

A related point on these second generation rights is that unless services actually exist, these
rights cannot be met. Im sure I dont need to tell any of you about how chronically stretched
our community health and welfare services are. Social workers have a vital role in exposing
these service gaps to show just how many Australians are missing out on having their
fundamental rights met. This is important work that can be done both inside and outside of
bureaucratic processes.

An example of campaigning for second generation human rights is the Close the Gap
campaign for Indigenous health equality that I have been coordinating with 40 of the leading
Indigenous and non-Indigenous health peak bodies. As I set out in my 2005 Social Justice
Report, Indigenous people have a right to health, which means that they should be able to
expect the same level of health care and related services to be healthy. Given that there is a
17 year life expectancy gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians we can
safely say that this right is not being met.

I urge social workers, both at an individual and collective level through structures like the
AASW to throw their support behind this campaign as a practical way of supporting human
rights. There is more information available at the HREOC website, including links to getting
involved. We will soon be convening a national summit on the issues and I am quietly
optimistic about our chances of securing some government action.

Third generation rights are collective rights which intersect perfectly with the social work
practice of community development. Community development, the discipline I focused on in
my career, is a way of working with, rather than for, communities to increase their capacity
and ability to find their own solutions to problems. Social workers are facilitators for this
process of change that occurs from the grass roots in a bottom- up way.

Professor Jim Ife and Lucy Fiske have argued that the relationship between community
development and human rights is so symbiotic that:

Community development needs a human rights based framework if it is to be successful, and

human rights needs a community development framework if they are to be realized.[2]

The marrying together of community development practices and human rights principles is
being increasingly recognised at the United Nations level. The United Nations Common
Understanding of a Human Rights Based Approach to Development Cooperation sets out
necessary elements of policy development and service delivery under a human rights based
approach as follows:

1. People are recognised as key actors in their own development, rather than passive
recipients of commodities and services.
2. Participation is both a means and a goal.
3. Strategies are empowering, not disempowering.
4. Both outcomes and processes are monitored and evaluated.
5. Analysis includes all stakeholders.
6. Programmes focus on marginalized, disadvantaged, and excluded groups.
7. The development process is locally owned.
8. Programmes aim to reduce disparity.
9. Both top-down and bottom-up approaches are used in synergy.
10. Situation analysis is used to identity immediate, underlying, and basic causes of
development problems.
11. Measurable goals and targets are important in programming.
12. Strategic partnerships are developed and sustained.
13. Programmes support accountability to all stakeholders. [3]

To me, these principles reflect what social workers are striving for and of course, how many
social workers are actually practicing already.

Community development has a special role in working with Indigenous communities as many
of our communities are struggling with enormous problems and disadvantage. The problems
that we face are so complex and often so entrenched that it can be counter productive to just
intervene at an individual level.

Let me paint you an all too common picture. An Indigenous child, say living in one of the
larger remote communities in the NT, comes to the attention of the social workers at the child
protection service. There have been notifications made about neglect - it looks like the child
is not getting enough to eat, may be in poor health and is only attending school sporadically.
It is known that the childs parents drink quite a lot and the living circumstances are poor at
home, to say the least.

So the social worker needs to decide what to do. Let me say firstly, the most important thing
is ensuring that the child is safe and their best interests are met. This is a fundamental human
right found in the Convention on the Rights of the Child which Australia is a signatory to.

But what does this mean in practice? It soon becomes very clear that the social worker is not
just dealing with the child or their parents but broader social and community patterns. In this
situation, it is likely that the community has very few viable employment options (and even
fewer if CDEP has been taken away); housing is no doubt overcrowded and in poor condition
(it is not uncommon for up to 20 people to be living in houses in NT remote communities);
alcohol is probably a problem in the community; with that comes violence, restarting that
cycle of destruction all over again. On top of that the social worker also has to contend with
the fact that as part of the welfare they probably dont have a very good reputation in the
community and it may be challenging to build a cooperative relationship. Lets not forget that
the Stolen Generation is still within living memory of many Indigenous people. Similarly,
when we look at the systemic failure of the child protection system highlighted in the Little
Children are Sacred report, Indigenous people are rightly wary and lacking in confidence in
the child protection system.

I paint this picture not to fill you with despair or suggest that the role of social workers in
Indigenous communities is hopeless. I paint this picture to show just how important it is that
we address these community wide, structural problems rather than looking at short term
individual band aid fixes. Many communities are really struggling but I am a firm believer
that they nonetheless, hold the answers to their problems. The role for social workers is
enabling them to access these solutions and strengths, consistent with their human rights.

This brings me to the Northern Territory intervention. June last year saw the introduction of
the Northern Territory intervention to protect women and children from violence and abuse.
Like many other Indigenous leaders I welcomed the governments intention to finally do
something about this long overdue situation and provide protection for Indigenous women
and children, but have had some serious concerns about how they have actually gone about
implementing their policy.

In my forthcoming Social Justice report, I provide a full human rights analysis of the NT
intervention, including some pertinent recommendations to government.

But for today I would just like to consider the intervention in terms of community
development principles and the practice of social work.

If community development is about building capacity through participation and local

solutions, the NT intervention flies in the face of this. The NT intervention is a classic
example of a top down approach which misses crucial opportunities to actually ask
communities what they want and how they think problems should be solved. Interestingly,
the first recommendation of the Little Children are Sacred Report which led to the NT
intervention, is that governments commit to genuine consultation with Aboriginal people in
designing initiatives for Aboriginal communities.

This, like most of the 97 well thought out and considered recommendations put forward by
Pat Anderson and Rex Wild, seems to have been ignored by the Australian government.
Some would argue that the ends justify the means. That is, we need to be pragmatic and act
now to stop the violence. This might mean that things like consultation and community
participation are too time consuming and get forgotten about or intentionally disregarded.
However, I am firmly of the opinion that the ends simply dont justify the means in this case.

This is the case with the fact that the NT intervention is potentially in breach of the Racial
Discrimination Act (RDA). The RDA was enacted in 1975 to fulfill Australias human rights
obligations under the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial
Discrimination. Some of the other human rights issues, especially around non compliance
with the Racial Discrimination Act and special measures, are quite legalistic. If you are
interested in looking into these further there is information in our submission to the Senate
Legal and Constitutional Committee on the NT intervention on the HREOC website, or keep
an eye out for the Social Justice Report in the coming months.

What I would like to say is that you cannot expect to create good policy that is in breach of
human rights. Human rights are universal and indivisible. Or in other words, they apply to
everyone equally and no human rights should be set above others. Obviously the government
has an obligation to act to protect the rights of women and children from violence and abuse
but this cannot be at the expense of the right to non discriminatory treatment. If we start
privileging some rights over others we get into the slippery situation where governments pick
and chose which rights they think are important to uphold and which are an inconvenience,
and so dont get met. And we know that it will always be the most disadvantaged and
powerless that will have their rights violated as they do not have the voice or means to be
heard.

If there is one thing that we can learn from good community development practices, it is that
the process is often just as, if not more, important than the outcomes because it equips the
community to then be able to do things for themselves. Or to revive a term that slipped out of
use under the Howard government, it is about self-determination.

Without a sense of control over life, people quickly slip into a state of powerlessness. We
know from experts like the respected Indigenous psychiatrist, Associate Professor Helen
Milroy, that if the NT intervention results in further dispossession or an extreme sense of
powerlessness, this will constitute a re-traumatisation of Indigenous people. In her opinion,
this will have a negative effect on:

Mental health including possibly higher rates of depression, stress and anxiety;
Social and emotional wellbeing through increasing anxiety and uncertainty and hence
this may precipitate family and community despair and dysfunction, poor or
maladaptive coping and contribute to substance use and possible violence as well as
loss of trust; and
Physical health as there is a strong relationship with chronic stress and poor health
outcomes including diabetes and cardiovascular disease.[4]

These unintended consequences will contribute to the problems of community dysfunction

rather than create an environment for meaningful change.

The eve of the Apology to the Stolen Generations is also a good time to think about the
consequences of interventions that breach human rights standards. A joint media release from
the National Coalition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Workers Association
(NCATSISWA) and the Australian Association of Social Workers (AASW) and other social
work peak bodies, put out in response to the Northern Territory Intervention and states:

The experience of the Stolen Generations has taught us that well intentioned interventions
with children and families can have long term consequences. Social workers have
acknowledged with regret the part we have played in that policy and we are determined that it
should not happen again. Long term solutions can only be found by working closely and
respectfully with Indigenous communities.[5]

I note that the AASW, back in 1997, endorsed a Statement of Apology on behalf of
Australias social welfare sector. I thank the AASW for making this apology so long ago and
also for the work of so many social workers in a professional and personal capacity to get
behind the push for a national apology. This momentous occasion has come about because
Indigenous and non-Indigenous people from all walks of life have demanded we do what is
right to move forward together.

The apology from the AASW was an important step because we know that social work and
other welfare services were often instruments of the separation of children from their
families. However, as I mentioned briefly before, the legacy of the role of social work and
welfare services sometimes lives on in compromised relationships with communities where
the welfare is still associated with the devastation of separation and the Stolen Generations.

Without pointing the finger of blame at social workers either individually or as a profession, I
would argue that this legacy still lives on today because of the unacceptably high number of
Indigenous children being taken into care. For instance, an Indigenous child is six times more
likely to be involved with the statutory child protection system than a non-Indigenous child
but fours times less likely to have access to a child care or preschool service that can offer
family support to reduce the risk of child abuse. Also, almost 40% of children nationally are
not placed in accordance with the Aboriginal Child Placement Principle.

Obviously, there is still a huge amount of work to be done in this area, but I would like to
reflect on the positive groundwork that has been laid by organisations like the AASW
actually making a formal apology to the Stolen Generations. It shows a real maturity as a
profession as well as compassion and empathy for those that were stolen. An apology
validates the experiences of those that were stolen from their families and the grief and pain
that followed. Validation and recognition are part of acknowledging our shared humanity.
Our shared humanity is really the basis of all human rights.

The AASW realised back in 1997, off the back of the Bringing them home Report, that a
formal apology was a necessary basis to move forward and develop more constructive
relationships between the social work profession and Indigenous communities. Im happy to
say that I think this is happening.

I note that social work curriculums across the nation all devote a significant amount of time
and focus to looking at skills for working with Indigenous people and communities in the
context of historical, social, economic and cultural considerations, so that the social workers
of tomorrow are well versed in issues that impact on their Indigenous clients.
Importantly, I think we have seen social work shift to a more critical focus where students are
given the skills to question power and structures at both a macro and micro level. This can be
seen in the way reflective practice is taught to students. This makes them more aware of their
own position as social workers (and the power that often holds) and challenges them to
continually find better, more inclusive ways of working. On going reflection and learning
keeps us from falling into the traps of the past.

It is great to see a growing number of Indigenous people entering the profession. More
Indigenous workers who are accessible to their communities will ultimately improve
community perceptions of the profession. Once again, I pay tribute to organisations like the
National Coalition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Workers who help make
this possible.

However, I think it is also important to reflect on the particular challenges of being an

Indigenous social worker. Social work is a demanding job for anyone and requires personal
resources to help people in great need. Id argue that for Indigenous social workers it is
especially hard. Because we often work in our own communities, with our own families, it is
a 24 hour job where you are always unofficially on call. This can be exhausting and also
creates its own challenges when a tough call needs to be made because it can be hard to
separate the personal from the professional.

Id also urge you in your work to remember that not all Indigenous people who work in
community service, health or welfare services have had the chance to gain formal
qualifications like Social Work. Because of this and the hierarchies that exist in some work
settings, they can feel like their experience and knowledge is not always valued. While these
workers may not have a piece of paper stating their qualifications, Id hazard a guess that
many of them know more about social work and human rights in their communities than all
of us put together. Social workers need to continue to work in partnership with Indigenous
people and communities.

Again, to give you a sneak peak of my forthcoming report, I have looked at a range of case
studies of programs that are working well to address violence and abuse in Indigenous
communities. Some of these are community development programs, some are client focused
casework and counselling services. All of them reinforce the same key messages - namely
that there are things that are working often against incredible odds. And those things that are
working are either generated directly by the community or the funding agency has taken real
steps to engage with the community at every step of the way. Some of the stories are
inspirational and there are some lessons that I am sure will resonate with your own thinking
and practice.

In some ways, none of this is news for social workers who work in alliance with individuals,
families and communities to deal with the consequences of family violence and child abuse
every day. But I would challenge you to look at these problems, your interactions with clients
and communities in terms of human rights issues.

As Ive shown, human rights are not just lofty principles that get talked about at the United
Nations. They are our everyday experiences of getting our needs met and an expression of
our shared humanity. They give social workers a framework for their advocacy, direct service
and community development work, especially when social workers can often be the ones
caught in the middle of the political mine field which is policy implementation. Human rights
are above politics and ideology so they are a useful tool in arguing for change.
Id also suggest that a human rights based approach to social work is about making clear
targets, ensuring targets are met and outcomes are evaluated. We are entitled to expect that
public policy will be:

evidence-based and informed by best practice models;

consistent with human rights laws and principles;
designed to meet targets and deliver measurable benefits over time;
subject to rigorous and transparent monitoring, evaluation and review, and
that governments will employ a learning framework so that past mistakes will not be
revisited.

Rights do not come without responsibilities. By this I mean that just as governments have an
obligation to protect rights, they also have a responsibility to ensure these rights can and are
met. Social workers have long been involved in advocacy and campaigning for social justice
but Id also ask that you continue to ask important questions that provoke accountability.
Social workers, with their strengths in reflective practice and learning from practice, are
ideally placed to be arguing for better evaluation and evidence led policy to ensure rights and
responsibilities are met.

You are also ideally placed to disseminate information about best practice models and
approaches to draw governments attention to what is working in Indigenous communities
both here and overseas and to advocate for changes that will deliver the best possible
outcomes and opportunities for our children and our communities.

Human rights based social work is important in all the work we do, but perhaps even more so
for Indigenous people and communities. As I mentioned in the example of the health
campaign, Indigenous people are low on a number of social indicators, so they are often
starting from a base where they do not have the same life chances as non-Indigenous
Australians.

But Indigenous people also have special rights as outlined in the United Nations Declaration
on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which was only passed by the UN in September last
year. The Declaration reaffirms that indigenous individuals are entitled to all human rights
recognised in international law without discrimination. But it also acknowledges that without
recognising the collective rights of Indigenous peoples and ensuring protection of our
cultures, indigenous people can never truly be free and equal. This is where social work
community development can support Indigenous communities in ways which are
empowering, based on partnership and recognising culture to move forward.

Your expertise, commitment to the fundamental principles of social work and hard work on
the ground is critical to assist Indigenous people meet their human rights.

Thank you.

[1]
Ife, J., Human Rights and Social Work, Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[2]
Ife,J. and Fiske,L. Human rights and community work: Complementary theories and
practices, (2006) 49 (3) International Social Work, p307.
[3]
United Nations, Frequently Asked Questions on a Human Rights-Based Approach to
Development
Cooperation, United Nations, 2006, available online at:
http://ohchr.org/english/about/publications/docs/FAQ_en.pdf, accessed 5 October 2007. For
discussion of a human rights based approach in the Australian context see: Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Social Justice Report 2005, HREOC
Sydney 2005, pp138-146.
[4]
Email correspondence from Associate Professor Helen Milroy with Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner, Tom Calma, 9 August 2007.
[5]
AASW, NCATSISWA, ACHSSW, ASSWE, Dont TAMPA with our aboriginal children,
Media Release, 28 June 2007

Address

Australia

Bookmark/Search this post

Shared 63 times

Shared 1 times

See also
Tanya Hosch appointment exactly what we need
Genome project helps close Indigenous health gap
National Sorry Day 2016
Close the Gap Campaign celebrates 10 years

General Information
About the commission
Contact us
Media contacts

Website Information
Accessibility
 About the website
Help
Disclaimer
Copyright
Privacy
FOI / IPS
Feedback

Quick Links
Asylum seekers and Refugees
Budget PBS 2016-2017
Bullying, violence and harassment
Defence Review
Family and Domestic Violence
Human Rights Awards
Information Publication scheme
Magna Carta
Play by the Rules
Power of Oldness
Speeches
Submissions
Subscribe
Supporting Working Parents
UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Workplace Cultural Diversity Tool

Useful Links
Annual Reports
Corporate Plan
Employers
Events
Hot Topics
Jobs
Links
Make a complaint
Publications
RightsTalk
Students
Teachers
Translated Information

Social Media

Other Links

Copyright Australian Human Rights Commission

Scroll to top