Some time back there was a lot of discussion about the 'forgotten australians' here on OLO.

There is article in todays SMH about them and the government is considering making an apology for their treatment. See link below.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/call-for-apology-to-500000-abused-children-20090625-cya1.html

It seems hopefull that all the effort put in by 'huff n puff' and others just may be bearing some fruit.

For their sake, I certainly hope so.

For those interested a copy of "The Forgotten Australians" inquiry is available and I think one has simply to google that to find how to get a copy. It is free.

My wife was in one of those child migrant schemes, and suffered terrible, ongoing abuse after arrival. While not all child migrants were so unlucky, the ones who suffered need their suffering to be finally officially recognised.

Luckily she recovered, and together over many decades we have forged careers as successful pastoralists here in outback Australia.

Surely they were covered by the apology to the Stolen Generation?
After all, it was the same group(children) getting the same treatment at the same time by the same people, so what’s the difference, apart from skin colour?
We’re not being racist are we? You wouldn’t be suggesting that white people deserve a separate apology?

Max,

This is a serious topic. I suspect you know, or care, little about the "actual" subject matter.

Max,
As I understand it, no the 'forgotten australians' was not covered in the PMs apology to the 'Stolen Generation'. At least the ones affected do not believe so, as the apology was specific.

It is ironic that there were some aboriginal kids put in the same instatutions so they too missed out on an apology.

If you have not read the report, please do so, it really is an eye opener. Some of the kids attended the same school as I did and we had no idea of the conditions they endured.

Well, you're wrong M, more than you know, or I care to explain.
My question is serious, and legitimate, and stands, what's the difference?