A recent article in The Age entitled ‘Victoria's Kooris battling a health crisis’ set me thinking. This article calls for more funding for the ‘25 Aboriginal-run health services’ and indicated that the ‘average life span for a non-Aboriginal Australian man is 76 and for a woman 82. But Aboriginal men can expect to live to just 59 and women to 65’.

It is absolutely fair and proper that we do all we can to ensure Aboriginal Australians, and all other Australians, have equitable health standards.

However, I am a little suspicious of the comparison made by the life expectancy statistics which seems to be inappropriate. Since the Aboriginal people are allocated exclusive health services on the basis of race it is safe to assume that the Aboriginal people, as a race, are (sadly) a low socio economic group. In that case the statistics for life expectancy for Aboriginal people must be compared with the statistics for non-Aboriginal people in the same socio economic group.

There is a correlation between socio economic status and health and according to a report on ‘Health and socio-economic equity’ the mortality rate ‘between bottom and top socio-economic quintile’ is significant.
(http://www.environment.gov.au/esd/national/indicators/report/value15.html):

Also according to this report, if I understand it correctly, no studies have been done to compare life expectancy of low income people with that of the general community. Where is the health equity if we have not even investigated the plight of other Australians in the same situation as Aboriginal Australians? Don’t we care about non-Aboriginal Australians?

According to The Age article ‘Many Aboriginal families in Melbourne are living in overcrowded, damp, cockroach-infested homes and wait up to three years for emergency housing.’ That heartbreaking picture applies equally to many non-Aboriginal Australians.

If Aboriginal people make up less than 3% of the population it is probable that there are more non-Aboriginal Victorians battling a health crisis than Aboriginal Victorians. Are they to be forgotten simply because they haven’t been included as a statistical group?

"Are they to be forgotten simply because they haven’t been included as a statistical group?"

Probably.

Dear Heduanna,

Australia is the only developed country on a World Health Organisation "shame list" of countries where children are still blinded by trachoma.

Impoverished Sri Lanka has beaten the disease, but not rich Australia.

According to the Director of the Centre for Eye Research in Sydney,
Professor Hugh Taylor, up to 80 per cent of Aboriginal children have potentially blinding trachoma because of untreated cataracts.

"This is inexcusable," he said.

In recent years, the health of Aboriginal women has so deteriorated that their death rate is six times that of white women. "A certain kind of statistical deafness has developed," wrote the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner.

In white Australia an enduring myth is the 'missing millions' of dollars that the Federal and state governments 'pour' into 'Aboriginal welfare.' It is the stuff of political and bar-room received wisdom, the fuel of bigotry, and it is false.

Dr Murray in Kimberley had been referring to a nationwide health review, which disclosed, that Aboriginal health received 25% less government funding per head of population than health care for whites.

For every dollar spent per head under the national Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, only 20 cents were spent, per head, on Aboriginal people.

When asked why the myth has such stamina. "It's part of the Australian pyche at some level," he said. "By believing that money has been spent and wasted, people move to the conclusion that conforms with what is in the backs of their minds: that the real reason is innate or genetic. More important, it allows white Australians to say it isn't their fault, it's the fault of Aboriginal people. A whole language of denigration backs this up.

"They don't look after their kids, and if only they would wash themselves" and allows the majority population to distance itself from the truth that our first nation continues to be denied essential citizenship rights. That's why we're last in the world, particularly when compared with New Zealand, Canada, and the US, which have comparable indigenous populations and where there has been significant progress in the last generation.

Dear Foxy,

I am not querying the seriousness of the health issues of Aboriginal people. I am querying the statistics that separate a group on the grounds of race from their socio economic group and compare the life expectancy of that group with the broader community. I am suggesting that if the statistics relating to the Aboriginal group were compared appropriately, that is with non Aboriginal Australians in the same socio economic group, then the gap would possibly not be as wide.

The comments by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner that you have quoted relate to a 1997 report so I am not sure of their relevancy. ‘In recent years’ could be referring to the 1980s (‘the health of Aboriginal women has so deteriorated that their death rate is six times that of white women’) and I would question the statistics ‘six times that of white women’ if ‘white women’ means all ‘white’ women from the broader community because once again it would not be an accurate comparison. (I assume ‘white women’ is a misnomer for all non-Aboriginal women.)

While it is clearly important the health issues of Australian Aboriginal people be addressed I do not think it is appropriate for statistics to be skewed in order to elicit more money for one group of Australians while possibly leaving other Australians disadvantaged.

(I am also intrigued by the continued use of the word Koori in Victoria. I was told by a Wurundjeri man that Koori is a NSW tribe and is not relevant to Victorian clans.)

Heduanna, Hi, I don't think aboriginal nation territories and "stste" borders are congruent. Koori is commonly used in southern NSW, for what thats worth.
Regarding health, as the large majority of aboriginals now reside in major cities it is of wonderment to me that access to medical advise is not apparently available to aboriginal peoples, as they are to all citizens of the country.
The health problems, reported by studies and the media, I've always understood were of those in remote communities? Stats don't seem to reveal this, how would one know?
fluff4

Dear Heduanna,

"Koori" is an Aboriginal language term used by Aboriginal people
in Victoria, Tasmania, and southern New South Wales to identify themselves.

Sometimes the word "Koori" is used on the posters and pamphlets which explain the reasons for collecting information about the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

The following is a website that may be of interest to you and some of the posters on this thread:

http://www.health.vic.gov.au/koori/general.htm

It may be of interest that in Victoria for the five year period -
1992 - 1996, the estimated life expectancy at birth of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander men was from 9-17 years less than the life expectancy of all men in Victoria.

The estimated life expectancy at birth of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women was 10-18 years less than the life expectancy of all women in Victoria.

But you don't have to take my word for it. For any more up date information in regards to recording of Indigenous Status - contact the Koori Health Unit, Department of Human Services on - (03) 9637-4039 or fax - (03)9637-4077.

Cheers.

Dear Foxy

Thank you for your information re the word Koori. Actually I am familiar with the word and the way it is used. The comment I made was really referring to the fact that some Aboriginal people do not like its use. The Wurundjeri man I mentioned (I believe he was an elder) indicated that it was not a word he and some of his clan were comfortable with. He said that when the ‘powers that be’ decided to use the word Koori instead of 'Aboriginal' many of the different clans, particularly here in Victoria, were not consulted. The conversation I had with him took place a few years ago so I cannot remember every detail but he mentioned that his language group has a word similar to Koori but it does not mean ‘people’. The meaning had something to do with ‘going to the toilet’ – I think that’s what he said. Anyway if that is the case you can understand why he was reluctant to accept Koori as a general term.

As for the issue of life expectancy I’ll just make my point again because I think I have not made it clear to you. I am not querying the accuracy of the statistics. I am saying they could be misleading because the comparison should be made with non Aboriginal Australians in the same socio economic group. I still have not found any statistics that makes the appropriate comparison.

And yes, fluff4, I take your point too about stats.

Dear Heduanna,

If you want comparable and accurate statistics - I've given you enough contacts. If you're genuinely interested - you will find the time to investigate - and satisfy yourself as to the facts.

Cheers.

Dear Foxy,

I did not mean to suggest I had ignored the contacts you supplied. It is just that the stats do not seem to be there. I expected to find them at ABS but the closest they come to it is stats grouped in geographic areas; neither do they seem to be available at the vic health website you suggested. I am happy to be pointed to a specific website if there is one. Since we have the stats on life expectancy of Aboriginal people all we need is the stats on life expectancy of non Aboriginal people in the low socio economic group. That’s what I have not been able to find. That is what is needed to truthfully assess the gap in life expectancy.

Foxy, do you know the context of "the health of Aboriginal women has so deteriorated that their death rate is six times that of white women. "?

It sounds sensational but without context it appears meaningless. Overall death rates are the same, for every life there eventually follows a death (ignoring the temporary reprieve of resuscitation).

Heduanna's whilst I see the point you are making it just shifts the issue not resolves it. If Koorie/Aboriginal socio economic status is so bad overall that it places them as a group amongst the poorest of the overall population that still shows that something is dramatically wrong. That could easily become a chicken and egg debate.

R0bert

I haven't seen any report yet showing us the difference in DNA and food requirement for a given DNA. As whites are able to test old buriel sites with the permission of indigenous peoples ofcourse,and take it from there as far as the average age is concerned plus what nutrition was needed, wouldn't that be the answer or part thereof?
For the logical minded, you wouldn't run a petrol engine on diesel would you or pour chlorinated,fluoridated tapwater onto your vegies and expect it to live a long life? Each clan should get back to their basic staple food or start a coop-patch to grow their "old" food.Same with white people as the UN reported recently.See next: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/apr/16/food.biofuels

Yes, Robert that is a very good point.

However, in the original article I referred to in The Age, Oxfam was calling for extra funds for Aboriginal health in Victoria on the basis of (among other things) the apparently significant gap in life expectancy. The use of these stats is designed to shock and elicit sympathy from the general public and if the stats are misleading it erodes the credibility of the groups using them. Obviously this will lead people to be suspicious of other information being put forward by those groups.

The other issue is that all Australians in the same low socio economic group deserve equal attention to their health issues. Focusing on a small section of that group can mean that the group as a whole is overlooked. I do not see how that contributes to the best interests of the community as a whole or to put it more poetically, to our gross national happiness.

Dear Heduanna,

I finally get the point that you are making.

Have you contacted the Library at the Department of Human Services
at all, or even the reference staff at your national library?

Library staff are usually great at helping with resources or at least pointing you in the right direction for the type of information that you're looking for.

Good Luck.

Good suggestion Foxy, thanks. I'll check it out. I agree with you about library staff. They are absolute treasures and I have not met an exception yet.

Heduanna, good causes using distorted stats or misleading representations is one of my pet hates. If nothing else it makes it harder for me to trust what I'm told by those using them.

It will be interesting to see if you can find anything about life expectancy for the lowest socio/economic groupings in Australia. I've seen some summary comments about that previously but don't recall where.

R0bert

Yes, RObert, I know what you mean. This practice is a double betrayal. It is a betrayal for the general public who are being presented with the issue because, apart from the fundamental issue of honesty, we tend to subconsciously equate integrity with doing good. The distorted or misleading use of statistics or other 'evidence’ is also a betrayal for the people those groups represent because it is likely to result in lack of support for their cause.

I have taken up Foxy’s suggestion and contacted a librarian who is generously doing some research on stats in the low socio economic groups and will get back to me although it might take a couple of weeks. The OLO forum administrator might also turn something up.

In relation to our previous discussion on comparing life expectancy of Aboriginal Australians with non-Aboriginal Australians in the same socio economic group I have received some information from a research librarian. (She actually got back to me very promptly but I have been too busy to investigate what she sent me until now.) Unfortunately we have not been able to find stats for life expectancy of non-Aboriginal Australians in the low socio economic group.

There are stats for Victorians who reside in local government areas classified as disadvantaged areas but that is not an accurate comparison.

These are the links sent to me:

http://www.health.vic.gov.au/healthstatus/le-01-05.htm

http://mhcs.health.nsw.gov.au/public-health/phb/may01html/socioecomay01.html

There is also a book held here at the State Library of Victoria: Health inequalities in Australia : mortality, by Glenn Draper (Canberra : Australian Institute Health and Welfare, 2004) which includes a section on “Mortality differences by socioeconomic disadvantage” (pp.xix – xxii). (I have not yet had an opportunity to look at this book.)