Between the 1950s and the 1970s, thousands of unmarried Australian women most of them white and under 25 were coerced or forced into giving up their babies for adoption. Known as the Forced Adoption Era, this period was characterised by institutionalised stigma surrounding single motherhood and the moral, religious, and social values of post-war Australia. The women affected were often isolated, shamed, and denied agency over their reproductive and maternal rights.
Following World War II, Australian society was marked by strong moral conservatism and a focus on traditional family structures. Single motherhood was viewed as a social failure and moral transgression. According to the Senate Community Affairs References Committee (2012), social workers, hospitals, religious charities, and government agencies collaborated in a system that pressured unmarried women into surrendering their children for adoption.
Between 1950 and 1975, an estimated 150,000 to 250,000 adoptions occurred in Australia, with a significant proportion involving coercion or lack of informed consent (Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2012). The majority of these mothers were white women from lower or middle socioeconomic backgrounds; often young women sent away to maternity homes or “mothercraft” hospitals to conceal their pregnancies.
The coercive mechanisms used during this period ranged from emotional manipulation to outright legal and physical control. Many women were told they were “unfit” to raise a child without a husband, or that adoption was the only “loving” option. Others were denied information about social welfare benefits that might have allowed them to keep their babies (Kenny et al., 2012).
In some cases, new-borns were removed immediately after birth without the mother’s consent. Documentation was often falsified or withheld, and women were prevented from holding or naming their infants. The social workers and nurses enforcing these policies were typically guided by a moralistic ideology that viewed adoption as a “redemptive” act for the mother and a path to a “better life” for the child.
The forced separation caused profound trauma for many women. Long-term studies indicate ongoing grief, depression, identity crises, and post-traumatic stress (Coleman & Cesario, 1992; Kenny et al., 2012). For many, the shame imposed by society silenced them for decades. The forced adoption practices also reinforced patriarchal and class-based ideologies, policing women’s sexuality and reinforcing the nuclear family as the only socially acceptable model.
The women were predominantly white because Indigenous women experienced a different, though parallel, system of child removal under the policies of assimilation and the Stolen Generations. While both systems were rooted in control and discrimination, they operated on distinct racial and policy frameworks.
After decades of activism by affected mothers and adoptees, the Australian Government issued a National Apology for Forced Adoptions in March 2013. Then–Prime Minister Julia Gillard acknowledged the “shameful practices” and the “denial of fundamental human rights” that occurred within hospitals, churches, and welfare institutions. Similar apologies were delivered by several state governments in the years preceding the federal statement.
Listed below are common myths and misconceptions about the forced adoption era.
- Myth 1: “The mothers freely chose adoption.”
In reality, many women were coerced, deceived, or legally manipulated into signing adoption papers. The Senate Inquiry (2012) documented systemic practices of withholding information, denying postnatal contact, and exploiting the vulnerability of unwed mothers.
- Myth 2: “Only poor or irresponsible women lost their babies.”
While class and economics played a role, the majority were ordinary young women, often from religious or middle-class families, where reputation and morality were paramount. Pregnancy outside marriage was seen as a social catastrophe rather than a personal event.
- Myth 3: “Adoption was the best option for the child.”
Research now shows that many adoptees experienced identity confusion, attachment difficulties, and psychological distress (Higgins, 2012). Moreover, the justification that adoption always served the “best interests of the child” often ignored the lifelong trauma of separation.
The forced adoption era in Australia represents a state-sanctioned moral panic that deprived countless women of their rights and dignity. It reflected a society unwilling to accept female sexual autonomy or support diverse family structures. While white women bore the brunt of this particular system, it forms part of a wider pattern of reproductive control that also includes the treatment of Indigenous mothers and marginalised women.
Sarah is a proud member of the Australian Association of Social Workers (AASW) and continues to uphold the ethical standards and principles of the profession in her day-to-day practice.
To make an appointment with Sarah try Online Booking. Alternatively, you can call Vision Psychology Brisbane on (07) 3088 5422.
References
- Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS). (2012). Past Adoption Experiences: National Research Study on the Service Response to Past Adoption Practices. Melbourne: AIFS.
- Coleman, P., & Cesario, S. (1992). Emotional and cognitive processes experienced by birth mothers who lose children to adoption. Journal of Social Work & Human Sexuality, 6(3), 65–88.
- Higgins, D. (2012). Impact of past adoption practices: Summary of key issues from Australian research. AIFS.
- Kenny, P., Higgins, D., Soloff, C., & Sweid, R. (2012). Past Adoption Experiences: National Research Study on the Service Response to Past Adoption Practices. AIFS Research Report No. 21.
- Senate Community Affairs References Committee. (2012). Commonwealth Contribution to Former Forced Adoption Policies and Practices. Canberra: Parliament of Australia.
- Gillard, J. (2013). National Apology for Forced Adoptions. Commonwealth of Australia.