Perhaps you are correct in that the raw figures you quoted show a greater number of sustantiated reports of abuse in non indigenous communities but I feel it does the kids from indigenous communities a dis-service.
The raw figures show a higher number of individual reports were substantiate din the non indigenous community but I suspect that is only because there are far more NON indigenous children around than indigenous - therefore it follows that the non indigenous community will have a higher number of sustantiated reports - nb because the number comes from an already much larger community.
I would never try to reduce the importance of this subject and for mine it, more than any other issue, is far too important to get stuck in a racial argument. However, it is too simplistic to just look at the raw figures you quoted.
There are problems both sides but indigenous children are over represented in abuse statistics. I DONT GIVE A RATS ARSE WHAT COLOUR THEY ARE - THEY NEED TO BE PROTECTED
TThat is why the study converts the figures to show the number of times substantiated abuse is found per 1,000 children in the two communities. This is what leads the same report you quoted from to say on page 22:
"Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are more likely to be the subject of a substantiation than other children. In 2004–05 in all jurisdictions, except Tasmania, the substantiation rate for Indigenous children was higher than the rate for other children."
This is not to say non indigenous communities don't have problems - of course they do - but the indigenous community remains over represented and to cloud that finding does those kids a dis-service.
There are obstacles that make it harder to protect kids in some indigenous communities - eg, lack of trust of police, lack of police proximity, general remoteness, apathy, politics, denial that a problem exists, racism (on both sides) etc etc. These need to be overcome and it won't happen unless the need is demonstrated with stats.
Another interesting finding is this
Compared with the distribution of family types in the Australian population, the 2002-2003 AIHW statistics found that children who were the subject of a substantiated report of child abuse were over-represented in single-parent, female-headed families (but the parent with whom the child is living may not have been the person responsible for the abuse) and in two-parent blended families. In contrast, a relatively low percentage of the children resided in two-parent intact families.
