Buraalgamayi: Positioning Koori Approaches to Social Work

Abstract

Summary

This article promotes Koori approaches to counselling and therapy to negate a range of issues inhibiting the efficacy of contemporary approaches to social work in Australia. To do so, it presents Buraalgamayi as a methodologically dynamic Koori approach to social work. Utilizing a Dunghutti social worker's professional reflections, an experiential standpoint is established from which Buraalgamayi can be respectfully deconstructed to allow insight into the underpinnings of its methodological dynamism. Vital deconstructed elements of Buraalgamayi are paired with analysis of current approaches to social work practice to contextualize Buraalgamayi's applicability. Finally, Buraalgamayi practice is reflexively discussed to draw its deconstructed elements and analysis together to provide further insight on the development and application of more effective approaches to social work.

Findings

Begin to position methodologically dynamic place-and-space based Koori approaches as desirable alternatives to current standards; and promote new understandings of social work and wellbeing based on Koori conceptual frameworks.

Applications

The methodological dynamism promoted within means the potential to apply Koori approaches in social work remains exponential, provided application is undertaken in a responsible and respectful manner.

Keywords

Social work social work values methodology knowledge community care indigenous

Introduction: Embracing Koori Way for Holistic Wellbeing

Social work within Aboriginal communities in Australia demands an approach that is both culturally sensitive and grounded in the values and worldviews of the people it serves. Buraalgamayi is the personal wellbeing “philosophy of practice” developed by a Dunghutti social worker in alignment with Koori Way,¹ practicing in the Illawarra and South Coast of NSW in Australia. Buraalgamayi describes a Koori² approach to social work that utilizes complementary values and methods to produce a dynamic methodological framework that can cater to the unique needs of each-and-every client. This contemporary approach is grounded in regenerating the Koori praxis upheld since beyond the reach of history and time itself.

This article positions Koori approaches to “social work” as universally therapeutically viable; and sophisticated beyond the bounds of contemporary westernized social work and current westernized frameworks, practices and interpretations of wellbeing. Buraalgamayi is provided as an exemplar of the dynamism and efficacy Koori approaches can enable. Unpacking Buraalgamayi firstly outlines three fundamental philosophical integrity points for this Koori approach; then maps three accessible westernized practices as landmarks within the current environment, stepping-stones on a transitional journey toward a praxis of privileging holistic Koori values and worldviews within social work; and finally provides three relevant culturally informed considerations regarding westernized social work conventions that intrinsically compromise approaches to social work with Koori clients. These three groups of three are reciprocally vital in developing dynamic, culturally appropriate approaches to Koori social work; and maximizing the efficacy of therapeutic processes for the benefit of both the practitioner and client.

To provide background context, this article includes reflections from a Dunghutti social worker. This establishes a Koori standpoint based on professional experience; summarizes Buraalgamayi in practice; and illustrates the glaring need for Aboriginal approaches to social work in Australia. Given its focus, this outline privileges mental health and wellbeing as conceptualized by the coastal Koori Peoples from the Mid-North Coast to the South Coast of what is now known as New South Wales; and as contextualized by the Places & Spaces³ that were instrumental in maintaining the “health and wellbeing” of all things, prior to their violent invasion and the commencement of settler-colonization by the British Crown in 1788. All things of Place & Space are attributed sentience and sovereignty in Koori praxis. Providing a vantage point beyond individualized healthcare to holistic wellbeing, Buraalgamayi strives to begin a journey back toward a socio-ecosystem of balance, that has been disrupted by the imposed normativity of violence, social inequality, and discrimination.

Buraalgamayi: Dunghutti to Illawarra and the South Coast

In the Dunghutti dialect, Buraalgamayi [boor-arl-gar-mayi] translated literally means two spears. As a basis for the Dunghutti social worker's approach to therapeutic practice presented within, the two spears represent the tools for survival that we are born with and the tools we develop along our life-long-learning journey: spirit and knowledge. Buraalgamayi is a contemporary approach to wellbeing that re-engages holistic Koori practice, privileging the regeneration of traditional Koori relationships with the world. Buraalgamayi encourages a reciprocal vantage point for both practitioner and client to gain a view beyond the immediate pain and challenges of contemporary life within settler-colonial Australia; to find strength in our identity, while embracing life-long-learning as a means of perpetual development. Buraalgamayi brings us closer to our roots, allowing us to foster a deeper connection to our Places & Spaces and ultimately, to ourselves.

Buraalgamayi draws on the rich cultural and historical backgrounds of a specific “bloc” of Aboriginal groups in Australia, who generally refer to themselves as Koori. The Koori groups relevant to Buraalgamayi, as the approach to social work presented within, span from Dunghutti on the Mid North Coast to the Illawarra and South Coast of what audaciously continues to be known as New South Wales. The philosophical underpinnings and navigable landmarks outlined are provided with the aim of better informing approaches to social work. This is undertaken through privileging Koori worldviews and providing a range of integrity points that, in effect, allow the triangulation of more appropriate approaches to Koori social work than those currently commonly available. The discourse presented staunchly posits that these “better informed approaches” will be beneficial for wider Australian society, not just Aboriginal Australia, as has been asserted by scholars such as Bennett and Gates (2021). By better understanding diverse cultural landscapes, social workers can provide more effective and respectful default levels of support for all clients.

Standpoint and Reflection

As a Dunghutti social worker living in the Illawarra/South Coast space, it is a part of my life-long-learning to continue to strengthen my connection to Koori Way. Concurrently, over the past 15 years, I have gained vocational, undergraduate, and post-graduate qualifications in Social Work and Trauma Informed Practice, through a western education undertaken on Illawarra and South Coast land; including five years’ experience as a fully qualified, accredited social worker. Within that time, it has become obvious that the community services sector is not adequately attuned to Koori strengths; and thus, remains acquiescent to the deficit-based understandings of “Indigenous Australia” that have proven destructive to the wellbeing of Our Peoples⁴ and Places & Spaces (Prehn, 2025). This persists despite the reification of interwoven notions of “Indigenous inclusion” and decolonization within relevant discourses (Bennett & Gates, 2021; Hunter & Jordan, 2010; Jones et al., 2025). As a Koori social worker, I have consistently found that settler-colonial organizational and governing structures actively inhibit my ability to embody my cultural values and practices when it comes to service delivery.

The ability to deliver effective services remains drastically constrained by westernized frameworks. These frameworks continue to reinforce disadvantage for Koori Peoples and uphold colonial standards of health and healthcare in Indigenous contexts: a process of ongoing colonization. For example, rather than challenging the economic determinism that inextricably ties service provision—and the quality of services—to funding, organizations are forced to adjust their operations, outputs and reporting protocols to fit the requirements of funding models. Social policy such as the admittedly problematic National Disability Insurance Scheme [NDIS] (Disney et al., 2025; Hummell et al., 2025; Productivity Commission, 2017) and Close/Closing the Gap [CTG] (Close The Gap Campaign Steering Committee, 2018; Gerrard et al., 2025; Larkin & Hobbs, 2022) exemplify this funding-service provision continuum. This normative dynamic ensures fundamental westernized worldviews and settler-colonial frameworks—that have inarguably imposed Indigenous disadvantage in Australia—are being relied upon to provide solutions to the problems that they themselves inherently pose. Despite the futility of this approach, funding models continue to prevent organizations from pursuing the acknowledged necessity of providing alternative service delivery options, in any meaningful way.

Koori communities are disillusioned with the conceded lack of “improvement” in outcomes, such as those aspired to in CTG initiatives. The obvious discrepancy between politicized public discourse, governmental funding allocations and a lack of tangible improvement in the wellbeing of Our Peoples (Larkin & Hobbs, 2022) indicates a certain futility in relying on the settler-colonial infrastructure to deliver social innovation in the interests of Koori communities. After over 200 years of the settler-colonial disruption of a pre-colonial symbiotic-equilibrium maintained through sophisticated, intimate relationships between all things (Kennedy et al., 2024), the fate of Our Peoples continues to be determined by those ontologically engaged in our elimination (Moreton-Robinson, 2009; Wolfe, 2006). This is in direct violation of Indigenous Peoples’ “right” to self-determination (United Nations General Assembly, 2007), which continues to be systemically denied through Australia's failure to enshrine the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [UNDRIP] in legislation (Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation, 2024). Considering this, arguments that CTG is not a program primed to assimilate fail to hold any purchase. The ongoing failure of Australian governments to “close gaps” in those social disparities imposed through governmental colonization policy is indicative of the need for a new tack to be taken.

Aboriginal Australia is somewhat removed from Indigenous discourses academically documented in other settler-colonial nations. Settler-colonial Australia weaponizes indigeneity at the constitutional level (Moreton-Robinson, 2009); axiomatically denying self-determination. Understandings of indigeneity in Australia are assimilated into the legacy of colonial labelling, categorization, and control of Koori and other “Aboriginal” identities (Australian Legal Reform Commission & Australian Health Ethics Committee, 2003). While international Indigenous populations embrace ideas of self-determination, Australia continues to construct an Indigenous Australia resembling the colonial version of indigeneity, more than it resembles Kooris. Vitally, this denies Kooris the privilege of articulating our self-determined values and philosophies with a truly place-based nuance. It is hoped that awareness of this encourages international Indigenous authorship to advocate for Kooris to develop our own articulations and contribute our own rich diversity to the international Indigenous community.

Koori Peoples need a true Koori approach that not only looks and feels authentic but privileges our protocols, philosophy, and worldviews. Professional experience as a social worker has led to many spaces where Koori strengths are not properly understood or readily acknowledged, let alone utilized in designing solutions for social issues around mental and physical wellbeing. Essentially, this suggests discourse regarding “Indigenous inclusion” and Indigenous wellbeing, epitomize a baseline of false generosity. Additionally, it omits the universal potential Aboriginal Knowledges and worldviews hold when it comes to improving wellbeing (Bennett, 2025; Keen & Kennedy, 2024). As a social worker, a significant part of my profession requires me to seek out the strengths of clients; identify areas in which improvements may be made; and to challenge the failure of services to deliver effective and relevant solutions. As a university student, these things were explicitly linked to the pursuit and application of genuine social change. Professionally, I am yet to see them carried through into service provision in any kind of meaningful, systemic way.

The Need for Aboriginal Approaches

Traditional Western social work practices often fail to address the specific needs of Our Peoples. This can be seen as inevitable when considering that westernized ideas of social functionality are often antithetical to Koori worldviews. Transaction, individualism, and hierarchy are defaults, upheld and rewarded, in westernized society; and all lead Aboriginal Australians away from Our Way⁵ of conceptualizing, valuing, and being with the world (Keen & Kennedy, 2024; Mowaljarlai & Malnic, 1993; Sveiby & Skuthorpe, 2006; Yunkaporta, 2023). An Aboriginal approach to social work is essential to deny this fundamental divergence and provide services that are relevant and beneficial to communities.

In this article, it is the coastal Koori communities who are being represented with specificity. The intrinsically therapeutic qualities of the Koori philosophy embodied by Buraalgamayi has been established in various educational applications (Keen & Kennedy, 2024; Kennedy, 2019; Kennedy et al., 2024). However, the need for Aboriginal approaches to social work applies across the continent. Addressing this need has begun to be taken up by social work scholars, such as Prehn (2025). It is asserted within this article that the Koori approach presented here will not be directly applicable to other Aboriginal communities without appropriate localization, asserted by Keen and Anand (2021) as essential in any application of Indigenous Knowledges. This is required to make any knowledge applicable to other Places & Spaces, through privileging those Places & Spaces. In this way, Buraalgamayi hopes to contribute to a foundation for the further development of genuine, dynamic Aboriginal approaches to social work that privilege the values and worldviews that have upheld holistic wellbeing in Koori and other Aboriginal societies for tens, if not hundreds (Sykes, 1984), of thousands of years.

Incorporating Aboriginal Values and Worldviews

Aboriginal values and worldviews offer a holistic and relational approach to social work (Hart, 1999). Engaging relevant, local Aboriginal values and worldviews as fundamental for social work can lead to more meaningful and effective support for Our Peoples and non-Indigenous people alike. Genuine Koori approaches to social work are inextricable from an underpinning values-driven philosophy, derived of Places & Spaces and aligned with the larger conceptual framework of Our Way.

Underpinning Philosophy

The philosophy of this approach is built on and emphasizes relational, place-based Aboriginal values. These values include deep respect for the land, community, and relationships that make the health of Peoples and Places inextricable (Jones et al., 2018, p. 2; Kennedy et al., 2024). This dynamic relationality drives Aboriginal understandings of life and the world (Yunkaporta & Shillingsworth, 2020) and therefore, must be considered integral to the wellbeing of Our Peoples. The relevant Illawarra/South Coast Koori articulation of this sophisticated philosophy is Maramal (Keen & Kennedy, 2024; Kennedy et al., 2024). Aspects of Maramal have been documented extensively within scholarly literature by Kennedy (2019) and Kennedy et al. (2019; 2022; 2023), primarily in relation to an award-winning curriculum development and pedagogy program (Kennedy et al., 2018).

Fundamental aspects of Maramal have been identified and tied back to Buraalgamayi and the range of communities attempted to be represented within this article. The following are three fundamentals that have been found to be universal amongst Koori communities: (1) Life-Long-Learning as a Way of Being; (2) Connection to Place & Space; and (3) Supra-Rationality.

Life-Long-Learning As a Way of Being

Our Way values life-long-learning praxis as the foundation for a cultural continuity unrivalled across the planet. Life-long-learning is a Koori “way of being” that includes learning from Elders, the community, and the environment. Keen and Kennedy (2024) articulate the relationship between “being and learning” as a pedagogical-ontology, central to contributing to the wellbeing of Place & Space and essential in ensuring the safety of Our Peoples, Places & Spaces and Knowledges holistically. This non-transactional pedagogical-ontology exists as a Knowledge-Spirituality continuum, in perpetual reciprocity with the ‘exponential potential’ of Place & Space, to raise awareness levels beyond their current bounds; beyond rationality and into supra-rational thinking (Keen & Kennedy, 2024; Yunkaporta & Moodie, 2021). The constant state of flux between being and learning within this continuum allows individuals “time” to sit with circumstances, while affording “space” to move beyond and reflect upon those circumstances in a meaningful, educational catalyzation of growth and development. Life-long-learning is integral to wellbeing as it is understood by Koori Peoples. Social work standards and practice should encourage and facilitate perpetual learning through the development of exceedingly intimate relationships with Place & Space (see below), as a means of facilitating wellbeing beyond the scope of the absence of illness. This remains true and beneficial for social workers, healthcare service providers and the people they serve, both Aboriginal and non-indigenous.

Connection to Place and Space [Country]

Connection to Country is recognized as a fundamental aspect of Aboriginal worldviews, identity, and wellbeing. The concept of Place & Space expands on the current Aboriginal contextualization of the westernized concept of country, removing its fundamental colonized connotations and reinstating intangible elements, such as spirit, in understandings of the connection between environments and Our Peoples. Social workers should recognize and honor this symbiotic connection by incorporating practices that acknowledge the significance of Place & Space in the lives of Our Peoples. This significance includes the understanding that Place & Space is the source of all knowledge (Kennedy et al., 2023); and that individual self-preservation and the preservation of our landscapes are inseparable (Kennedy et al., 2024). The magnitude of Place & Space's influence in upholding the physical and mental wellbeing of Our Peoples and Our Way is gaining increasing recognition within relevant academic discourse (Fatima et al., 2023; Thorpe et al., 2023; Watt et al., 2025); and service provision frameworks (New South Wales Ministry of Health, 2020). However, this talk is yet to be walked in ways that have drastically impacted conventional westernized approaches to social work. This immobility is observable within the prolonged, deliberately constructed, social disadvantage still affecting the lives of Our Peoples.

Supra-Rationality

Connecting individuals to Place & Space is a vital catalyst for the re-engagement of Place as a supra-rational source of knowledge, a reconnection of knowledge and spirituality. Supra-rationality is a physical enactment of Knowledge-Spirituality, achieved through the ceremonial actualization of the relational reciprocity between all things. Supra-rationality privileges Place & Space as a sentient “primary source” of knowledge, beyond what can be known individually. Ceremony enables the realization of knowledge, influenced beyond the sum of information gained through the conscious individual experiences of those involved in the ceremonial “thought ritual” (Yunkaporta & Moodie, 2021). In this sense, supra-rationality is deeply place-based; reciprocally revealing levels of awareness that help align the values of People and Place. Traditional Koori decision-making privileges supra-rationality within preventative problem-solving to facilitate wellbeing. Communities who have managed to retain pre-colonial wellbeing practices and parameters highlight the healing nature of this Knowledge-Spirituality (Ngaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjar Yankunytjatjara Women's Council Aboriginal Corporation, 2013; 2003). The expanded rationality facilitated through this reconnection allows Place & Space to contribute to the holistic wellbeing of all elements of itself, including community and knowledge. Supra-rationality forms a significant aspect of what Keen and Kennedy (2024) articulate as an exponential potential for the positive benefits of methodologies underpinned by Koori place-based philosophy. Similarly, Yunkaporta and Moodie (2021) emphasize supra-rationality as relational to the efficacy of discrete Aboriginal methods underpinned by Aboriginal values and ontologies. In the context of social work, supra-rationality provides a reference point outside of the constructed colonial narrative to allow clients and practitioners to enhance their understanding of identity and foster a sense of belonging, purpose, and wellbeing. A sense of belonging is vital not only for Kooris but for all, particularly in the context of mental health (Hagerty et al., 1992; Raman, 2024; Sargent et al., 2002). In this sense and many more, supra-rationality provides a potential for social work practice that is currently under-acknowledged.

Journey Toward Praxis

The optimistic aspiration of Buraalgamayi is to transition toward social work approaches that privilege Koori philosophy, in a way that transcends theory: praxis. Freire (2017) describes this journey from theory-based practice to praxis as transformative in an emancipatory context. In the case of Buraalgamayi, the reification of reflexivity within therapeutic approaches allows a level of automatic critical engagement, in a way that may begin to align with Koori worldviews that epitomize holistic wellbeing praxis. Embodying holistic Koori philosophy in methodology involves life-long-learning as a way of being, constantly moving along a theoretical understanding and practical application continuum, toward praxis. As an extension of the place-based philosophical framework, enriched by aspects of Maramal, the production of praxis allows methods to be applied dynamically in a way that is informed through supra-rationality and in response to the unique circumstances of their application. Through the Koori protocol of regularity and routine (Kennedy et al., 2024), this journey is embodied in various Buraalgamayi methodological configurations and practical applications. The following three landmarks have been mapped as accessible stepping stones toward a more sophisticated approach to social work in Buraalgamayi operations, on a journey between theory and practice, toward praxis.

Post-Traumatic Growth

Post-traumatic growth [PTG] allows strength-based understandings of post-invasion Aboriginal Australia to exist within social work. PTG is explained as positive personal development through enduring extreme adversity (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004). In this sense, PTG can be understood as both a process and an outcome, as well as a fundamental philosophical shift from current trauma informed approaches. As a practical basis for a responsible understanding of Our Way, this conceptualization of PTG does not deny the ontological reality of ongoing settler-colonial elimination's inextricability from life in Australia (Wolfe, 2006). However, it allows Aboriginal communities who hold historical and ongoing intergenerational trauma a removal from deficit-based victim frameworks, while acknowledging the complexity of Koori life in the Australian refugium. The impacts of intergenerational trauma have been linked to not only the modification of individual and collective behaviors but to genetic alteration, with various impacts (Joseph, 2020; Schafte & Bruna, 2023; Yehuda & Lehrner, 2018). Additionally, for those of us contributing actively to Place & Space, the ambient trauma of ongoing colonization is a default setting of the settler-colonial society in which we are “kept.” The overexposure to trauma caused by the settler-colonial westernization of Our Way and the prevalence of trauma's association with disorder essentially form an axiom of deficit that dissonantly denies Koori strengths.

PTG gives an example of the embodied application of life-long-learning praxis. In essence, PTG constitutes an element of Koori life-long-learning. Our experiences remain central to our ongoing development and concurrent wellbeing. Focusing on PTG can help individuals and communities explore a non-transactional relationality; to move beyond their trauma; understand spirituality beyond its religious connotations; and develop resilience and strength (Henson et al., 2021; Jayawickreme et al., 2021). Without a notion that functional growth can follow trauma, Kooris continue to be understood within deficit-based parameters of disorder, the perpetual victims to the circumstance of colonization. In conjunction with the type of complementary culturally informed practice discussed here, PTG encourages a shift away from deficit-based westernized understandings and approaches.

Walk and Talk Therapy

Engaging in “walking and talking” sessions can strengthen practitioner relationships with clients and engage Place & Space in therapeutic practice. Walk and talk therapy allows practitioners to tailor their social work approaches to align with a range of values and worldviews (Revell & McLeod, 2017). This dynamism is vital when it comes to accommodating the unique needs of Koori clients, a uniqueness that extends to the Places & Spaces of our experiences. Additionally, it allows clients and their experiences agency within the therapeutic process. This encourages a collaborative safe space for the client to communicate and implement solutions guided by their own perspectives (Revell & McLeod, 2017). This approach emphasizes the importance of being present and active in Place & Space; and in the context of Koori life-long-learning as a way of being, enables the engagement and privileging of Place & Space's influence (Keen & Kennedy, 2024). Given this alignment with Place & Space, walking and talking's engagement in therapeutic processes for Kooris should be considered essential.

The “walking of a story” in Place & Space is integral to Koori wellbeing. It contributes to an intimacy that allows improved feelings of belonging (Kennedy et al., 2024); empowers clients and evokes emancipatory dialogic learning (Freire, 2017) in co-producing freedom of expression (Prince-Llewellyn & McCarthy, 2025); and disrupts the structural power-dynamics of settler-colonial structures, both physical and ideological. Conventional settler-colonial clinical spaces disconnect processes undertaken within them from nature. This inhibits Place & Space and restricts the movements and behaviors of clients according to the pre-determined expectations of both the client and the setting (Foucault, 1991; Goffman, 1990). As a practical intersection between westernized and Koori methods of facilitating wellbeing, walking and talking in Place & Space can be considered a key component of any effective social work framework intended to empower clients.

Active Listening

Traditional modes of Aboriginal communication prioritize the efficacy of vocalization, nomenclature and lexicon, treating speaking as secondary to listening. Consequently, communication within social work approaches involving Our Peoples requires active listening and nuanced non-verbal perception (Ungunmerr-Baumann, 2002). In this sense, active listening becomes a vital aspect of Koori social work, privileging listening over speaking. Rodat (2020) states that active listening is vital to genuine empathy. In situations where non-Indigenous practitioners are servicing Koori clients, the importance of empathy cannot be overstated. Without active listening, the level of non-Indigenous understanding of the Koori experience required to form, let alone operationalize, genuine empathy is unlikely. A propositional comprehension of the normative systemic and systematically imposed perpetual disadvantage, as known experientially by Koori Peoples, obstructs empathy; and often results in culturally inappropriate and unsafe practice. Active listening provides a remedy for the confusion surrounding cultural safety in healthcare identified by Cox and Best (2022) as lethal for Koori Peoples.

Active listening—and by extension, empathy and cultural safety—is essential due to settler-colonial society dictating that indigeneity is experienced individualistically by Kooris. Generally, in urbanized settings, no two cultural experiences are the same; and require cultural expressions to be contextualized by the client, making the omission of active listening from practice intrinsically unsafe. In the westernized worldview prone to homogenizing and historicizing the ongoing impacts of settler-colonization (see Thompson & Duthie, 2016), cultural safety is malleable to personal perspectives (Keen & Kennedy, 2024). This means that even scholarship championing cultural safety can be culturally unsafe. Social workers should actively listen to the stories, needs and perspectives of the people they serve. Active listening's ability to enhance the relationality of practitioner and client (Tustonja et al., 2024) means it essentially becomes necessarily complementary to PTG and walking and talking's methodological negation of a hierarchical power-dynamic, in pursuing Koori wellbeing. This ability to negate the hegemonic norms shown and known to be destructive for Koori culture is unfortunately still fundamental in adequately providing social work services to Koori Peoples.

Beyond the Westernized Paradigm

Denying the individualistic and exploitative transactional tenets of westernized social work practice is crucial to adopting an Aboriginal approach. Reciprocally, increasingly adopting Aboriginal approaches is crucial in subverting the discriminatory westernized hegemony (Keen & Kennedy, 2024; Yunkaporta & Shillingsworth, 2020). This “chicken or egg” situation has capitulated in other aspects of Aboriginal life in Australia, where westernized transactional and hierarchical values have become part-and-parcel of the representation of Aboriginal Australia, such as “Indigenous entrepreneurship” (Collins & Norman, 2018; Maritz & Foley, 2018) and “Indigenous science” (McKinley, 2013; Yabang et al., 2025). However, in social work contexts, there can be no legitimate claim made that the current hegemony is particularly effective at providing solutions to ongoing social problems such as human rights (Boryczko et al., 2023; Webb, 2009); poverty (Amar & Armitage, 2025; Parolin et al., 2025), and homelessness (Hastings, 2024; Walsh et al., 2025). Many problematic issues when it comes to Koori social work are endemic to westernized societies, their normativity enduring a span in westernized spaces beyond that of Australia's colonized existence. Yet, despite their recognized problematic qualities when it comes to social wellbeing, defaults such as transaction and hierarchy remain prominent within the field of social work and the healthcare “industry.” Below we unpack three key aspects of the current hegemonic approach to social work that should be considered intrinsically problematic for Koori social work.

Standardization

The standardization of social work practice occurs within the scope of the Australian Association of Social Workers’ Practice Standards (2023) and funding model requirements. Models such as the NDIS often emphasize standardized outcomes that do not align with Aboriginal values. Examples of these extend into case management and reporting. Through reporting and organizational risk management requirements, standardization inhibits the dynamism needed to fully follow through with the accessible benefits discussed earlier. For example, allowing the implementation of solutions suited to the client's unique needs—as made possible through walk and talk therapy—becomes difficult when the client's values and worldview diverge from those embodied within standardized transactional social work practice. Essentially, standardization inhibits particularization through Place & Space, ensuring methodological frameworks and approaches to service provision tie back to westernized conceptualizations of healthcare, such as transactional wellbeing (see below). For Kooris, this divergence is inevitably problematic in upholding cultural alignment. Therefore, standardization actively denies the influence of Koori values and worldviews and operates to devalue the strength of diversity in Koori Way. It has long been posited in westernized social work and healthcare that one-size-fits all approaches are inadequate (Moreau, 1979). Yet standardization within healthcare industries continues to ensure that Koori ideas of wellbeing should fit within the slim scope of variation allowed in standardized westernized practice.

Transactional Wellbeing

Westernized social work practices and funding often focus on the reporting of outcomes and key performance indicators [KPIs]. This embodies a transactional way of being that fails to reflect Koori worldviews and values. Therefore, this approach neglects the true needs and values of Koori Peoples and Places & Spaces. In addition, within the scope of healthcare provision for Kooris, it is inevitable that outcomes and KPIs are shaped through the ontological embodiment of settler-colonial elimination logic, targeted at both Our Peoples and Our Way (Wolfe, 2006); and uphold the violent treatment of Our Peoples at a constitutional level (Moreton-Robinson, 2009). However, the damage of this approach impacts beyond its intensification within the scope of Koori social work. Tunstill and Blewett (2015) assert that this “payment by results, ‘outcome theology’” (p. 234) is counterproductive for both the client and practitioner. Those unable to adhere to the designated requirements can be—and are—impacted negatively by outcome focused policy frameworks. This intrinsic relationship between reporting and funding has led to a range of issues that compromise normative westernized social work practices and devalue non-transactional worldviews in social work practice. These issues include, yet are not limited to, restricting client autonomy (Nikidehaghani, 2024); creating an axiological impasse for service providers (Tunstill & Blewett, 2015); regulatory scandal intersecting with client abuse (Hough, 2021); and the ignorance of policymakers when it comes to specific funding models, such as the NDIS (Wardlaw, 2021). There can be no doubt that adopting a Koori approach to social work necessarily strives to address transactional normativity, a major obstacle to not only the wellbeing of both clients and practitioners but the system that facilitates their relationships. Social workers should critically assess this outcome theology, not only in practice but in policy, and strive to regard transactional ways as counter-productive to holistic wellbeing.

The Westernization of Wellbeing

Westernized healthcare leaves little to no room for Knowledge-Spirituality; a concept central, not only to Aboriginal notions of self and identity, but to the maintenance of wellbeing. Although this is far too big a topic to tackle in a single article, it must be acknowledged that the removal of spirit from our “being” and wellbeing invisibly underpins any discussion on Indigenous wellbeing in Australia; and perhaps the world. The westernized idea of individualized human healthcare—mental and physical—lacks the capacity to accommodate many Aboriginal People's place-based ideas of ourselves and our health in their entirety (Creighton, 2016). Spirituality is omitted from the scope of mainstream healthcare, meaning the conceptual basis of Our Knowledges is disregarded. Therefore, at a paradigmatic level, the Australian healthcare industry and service provision sector operate to assimilate our understandings of ourselves into those of “the West.” The systemic removal of the wellbeing of Place & Space from understandings of wellbeing prevents westernized healthcare from contributing to holistic care, as Kooris conceive it; not as an individual's lack of disease and illness but in the maintenance of the vibrational symbiotic-equilibrium of Place & Space. Repercussions of this ongoing removal of spirit continues to compound misrepresentations and confound attempts to understand Indigenous health in westernized societies. Until it is acknowledged and its omission actively addressed, Knowledge-Spirituality is unlikely to be considered valid. In westernized healthcare and wellbeing frameworks, it is left to the ingenuity of individual practitioners to create spaces able to accommodate Knowledge-Spirituality within standardized transactional approaches to healing and wellbeing.

Reflection: Buraalgamayi in Practice

In practice, Buraalgamayi engages Aboriginal active listening praxis within Walking and Talking to encourage PTG as a part of the life-long-learning journey. As a primary approach to individual therapy and counselling, Buraalgamayi is a sophisticated model that conceptually and contextually extends beyond the scope of westernized rationality and tangibility; and therefore, suffers greatly when considered within the current “helping the broken” power-dynamic prevalent within westernized healthcare industries. Buraalgamayi actively allows people to feel neither physically nor mentally confined by the expectations and power-dynamics of settler-colonial Australia and its structures. Concurrently, the approach emphasizes the need to privilege Place & Space in personal healing and development. Almost without exception when it comes to Buraalgamayi, walking and talking has effectively alleviated anxiety and stress to produce a relaxed and comfortable shared environment. The efficacy of these combined methods has proven consistent across a range of clients, from those whose issues necessitated this approach through a difficulty in expressing trauma in closed spaces, to those previously underwhelmed by therapy and/or nature and its ability to impart wellbeing. Within Buraalgamayi practice, walking and talking is credited with frequently enabling both client and practitioner to share their experiences more freely; allowing clients to feel more comfortable about their ability to develop personally and produce their own solutions to both old and new issues they are faced with; and has contributed to the overcoming of trauma-related phobias.

Buraalgamayi has met significant challenges when it comes to the “outcome theology” of the service delivery sector. As discussed, transactional underpinnings and regulatory standardization dominate contemporary social work, particularly when it comes to funding models. Regular under-treatment of clients in need of more services, due to a lack of accessible funding; and the organizational propensity to push for further diagnoses to access more funding for clients, have both proven to be points of frustration in attempting to maximize the efficacy of therapeutic approaches through Buraalgamayi. In a specific case, an individual Koori participant had been financially facilitating ongoing group therapy sessions formerly funded by the government. When this was made known to a relevant organization, no assistance was allowed to be offered. This decision was upheld despite the wishes of the social worker involved and lower management; and the minimal support required by the group being shown as likely to be viable in the long term. Although providing support would have aligned with the organization's proclaimed ambitions, a failure to be able to frame that specific case within the existing funding model meant that those engaging in self-development and the development of others were left to fend for themselves. Unfortunately, this disregard for wellbeing is not uncommon. Ideally, a healthcare system primed for Koori wellbeing would possess the dynamism necessary to accommodate proven effective approaches like Buraalgamayi, rather than Koori approaches needing to adjust to a transactional outcome theology.

Limitations

The information and findings supplied within are directly applicable only to the Places & Spaces of their origin. While this limits direct applicability of Buraalgamayi to other Peoples, it is also seen as an important mechanism to ensure that the necessary engagement with Our Communities is undertaken in attempts to apply any aspect of this outline within and without the Koori Places & Spaces to which it is inherently relevant.

Many of the terms and concepts utilized within this article—such as Koori and Place & Space—are not well socialized outside of their localized usage. This applies across academia, settler-colonial social work industries and/or mainstream discourse. This is not simply an international issue, as Australia continues muting self-determined Koori cultural expressions. Although we have attempted to provide adequate context in the footnotes, the authors encourage queries and further engagement with any terminology and concepts we have failed to address adequately for the reader. It must be acknowledged that this is an imposed limitation. After over 200 years of the violent occupation of our Places & Spaces, it is a travesty and an indictment for the self-proclaimed civilized and advanced contemporary Australian society, that the world has no cogent understanding of Koori Peoples and Koori Way to draw upon when engaging with Koori scholarship.

Conclusion

A Koori approach to social work is essential to ensure the mental health and wellbeing of both clients and practitioners who occupy Koori Places & Spaces. Grounded in the philosophy, values and worldviews of Our Way, Aboriginal approaches address fundamental underpinning issues obstructing the efficacy of mainstream social work practice. In this way, Koori approaches are not just beneficial for Kooris but provide a potential to improve social work for all. It is hoped that this article will encourage and empower the engagement of the ideas within, particularly in the local communities that they serve to represent. It is also hoped that the points articulated within provide a basic insight into a platform that can be further explored through engagement with other Places & Spaces in which they prove relevant, responsible, and respectful.

In sharing Buraalgamayi, the personal approach of a Dunghutti social worker developed in relationship with Illawarra/South Coast Places & Spaces, core tenets necessary to develop more dynamic and relational approaches to facilitating wellbeing have been identified. Stopping short of presenting Buraalgamayi as a formalized framework emphasizes how these tenets underpin a methodological dynamism that is unfortunately hampered by westernized norms. This dynamism is vital in meeting the challenges presented within the current scope of social issues while attempting to negate their systematic normativity and axiomatic continuity. Responsibly engaged and localized to the Places & Spaces they are applied, these tenets provide “integrity points,” ensuring practitioner approaches can be “triangulated” to empower both themselves and their client in generating wellbeing through their therapeutic interactions. By incorporating these tenets into social work approaches in development toward a praxis, social workers can look forward to providing holistic and effective support that honors the rich heritage and strengths of Our Way and benefits all.

It must begin to be acknowledged that westernized approaches to social work fall within the bounds of a westernized worldview that is exponentially problematic. Transactional, hierarchical, and standardized frameworks all directly oppose fundamental tenets of Place & Space informed Koori worldviews; and social work approaches shaped by those qualities inevitably intrinsically inhibit the upholding of Koori values and responsibilities. This is not a healthy standard to aspire to; and practitioner acquiescence amounts to complicity in the ongoing colonization of Our People, Places & Spaces and ultimately, Our Way. The westernized socio-political hegemony dictates that the onus to initiate change falls on those individuals able to dream beyond the bounds of the westernized worldview. In deconstructing Buraalgamayi, it is hoped that practitioners and social work scholars have an accessible means to begin to raise their awareness to the levels required to do so.

Footnotes

Author Note

This is a preliminary document in an intended series of academic articles authored to continue to add nuance and sophistication to articulations such as Our Way and Place & Space.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge and thank our Places & Spaces: Dunghutti, Gomeroi, the Illawarra and South Coast.

ORCID iD

Joel Keen

Ethical Considerations

Ethical approval was not required as research did not involve human nor animal participants and/or biological samples, extracted personal data, or any identifiable information. All personal data are reflections of the lead author's own personal experience.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research and authorship of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Supplemental Material

All supplementary research materials are included under References and can be accessed either online or in print.

Notes

References

Amar

J. H.

Armitage

L. A.

(2025). Understanding barriers and pathways for the sustainable implementation of affordable housing in Australia: The case of the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS). Buildings, 15(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings15030454

Australian Association of Social Workers. (2023). AASW Practice Standards. https://aasw-prod.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/AASW-Practice-Standards-FEB2023-1.pdf.

Australian Law Reform Commission & Australian Health Ethics Committee. (2003). Essentially Yours: The Protection of Human Genetic Information in Australia (ALRC Report 96). Australian Federal Government.

Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation. (2024, July 20). UNDRIP in Australia. Retrieved May 15, 2025, from https://antar.org.au/issues/undrip/australia/#:∼:text=Australia%20often%20cites%20'federation%20complexity,across%20Commonwealth%2C%20states%20and%20territories.

Bennett

(2025). Caring for country: Social workers standing in solidarity with indigenous disaster practices. In Adamson

(Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of social work and disaster practice (pp. 105–118). Routledge. https://dx. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003309208-10

Bennett

Gates

T. G.

(2021). Working towards cultural responsiveness and inclusion in Australia: The re-indigenization of social work education. Social Work & Policy Studies: Social Justice, Practice and Theory, 4(2), 1–22. https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/SWPS/article/view/15288

Boryczko

Lusk

Madew

(2023). Human rights and the decolonization of social work. In Madew

Boryczko

Lusk

(Eds), Decolonized approaches to human rights and social work (pp. 3–27). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33030-8_1

Close the Gap Campaign Steering Committee. (2018). Close the gap: A ten-year review: The closing the gap strategy and recommendations for reset. Australian Human Rights Commission.

Collins

Norman

(2018). Indigenous entrepreneurship and indigenous employment in Australia. The Journal of Australian Political Economy, 82(1), 149–170. https://search.informit.org/doi/pdf/10.3316/informit.213017832240329

10.

Cox

Best

(2022). Clarifying cultural safety: Its focus and intent in an Australian context. Contemporary Nurse, 58(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/10376178.2022.2051572

11.

Creighton

A. R.

(2016). Gaba Binggi (Good Needles): Developing an understanding of how two Aboriginal* communities see and experience immunisation during pregnancy [Master’s Thesis]. University of Sydney.

12.

Disney

Yang

Summers

Devine

Dickinson

Kavanagh

A. M.

(2025). Social inequalities in eligibility rates and use of the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme, 2016–22. Medical Journal of Australia, 222(3), 135–143. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.52594

13.

Fatima

Liu

Cleary

Dean

Smith

King

Solomon

(2023). Connecting the health of country with the health of people: Application of “caring for country”. The Lancet Regional Health–Western Pacific, 31(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2022.100648

14.

Foucault

(1991). The birth of the clinic. Routledge.

15.

Freire

(2017). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Penguin Classics.

16.

Gerrard

Godwin

Whiteley

Charles

Sadler

Chuter

(2025). Co-design in healthcare with and for First Nations Peoples of the land now known as Australia: A narrative review. International Journal for Equity in Health, 24(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-024-02358-2

17.

Goffman

(1990). The presentation of self in everyday life. Penguin.

18.

Hagerty

B. M.

Lynch-Sauer

Patusky

K. L.

Bouwsema

Collier

(1992). Sense of belonging: A vital mental health concept. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 6(3), 172–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9417(92)90028-H

19.

Hart

(1999). Seeking Minopimatasiwin (the good life): An Aboriginal approach to social work practice. Native Social Work Journal, 2(1), 91–112. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277232606_Seeking_Minopimatasiwin_the_Good_Life_An_Aboriginal_approach_to_social_work_practice

20.

Hastings

(2024). Why do some disadvantaged Australian families become homeless? Resources, disadvantage, housing and welfare. Housing Studies, 39(10), 2479–2503. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2023.2194248

21.

Henson

Truchot

Canevello

(2021). What promotes post traumatic growth? A systematic review. European Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 5(4), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejtd.2020.100195

22.

Hough

(2021). Regulating disability services: The case of Australia’s National Disability Insurance Scheme quality and safeguarding system. Research and Practice in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 8(2), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/23297018.2021.1942176

23.

Hummell

Foster

Burns

Rimmer

S. H.

(2025). Policy shifts and drifts: From intention to implementation of Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 85(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12689

24.

Hunter

Jordan

(2010). Explaining social exclusion: Towards social inclusion for Indigenous Australians. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 45(2), 243–265. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1839-4655.2010.tb00177.x

25.

Jayawickreme

Infurna

F. J.

Alajak

Blackie

L. E.

Chopik

W. J.

Chung

J. M.

Dorfman

Fleeson

Forgeard

M. J. C.

Frazier

Michael Furr

Grossmann

Heller

A. S.

Laceulle

O. M.

Lucas

R. E.

Luhmann

Luong

Meijer

McLean

K. C.

Zonneveld

(2021). Post-traumatic growth as positive personality change: Challenges, opportunities, and recommendations. Journal of Personality, 89(1), 145–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12591

26.

Jones

Anka

Segev

Allassad Alhuzail

Mohamed

Wallengren-Lynch

Cantley

Mitra vom Berg

Laver

Hammond

Chen

H. L.

(2025). Decolonising social work practice field education: A scoping review. International Social Work, 68(6), 1032–1050. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208728241303596

27.

Jones

Thurber

K. A.

Chapman

D’Este

Dunbar

Wenitong

Eades

S. J.

Strelein

Davey

Olsen

Smylie

J. K.

Banks

Lovett

(2018). Study protocol: Our cultures count, the Mayi Kuwayu study. BMJ Open, 8(6), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023861

28.

Joseph

(2020). Epigenetics and intergenerational trauma [Unpublished Thesis]. Community Commons Resource Library.

29.

Keen

Anand

(2021, October 15). Reconciling the indigenous and the international: Localisation [conference abstract]. Proceedings of InternationalEd2021 (pp. 35

–

36).

30.

Keen

Kennedy

(2024). Utilizing Aboriginal place-based methodologies to establish new relationships with “old” knowledges. Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529682311

31.

Kennedy

(2019). An Aboriginal way to build knowledge-based relationships into curriculum. HERDSA Connect, 41(3), 24–25. https://search.informit.org/doi/pdf/10.3316/informit.938753429310299

32.

Kennedy

Almeida

Gibbons

Clarke

Bicego

Phelan

(2022). A business faculty, Jindaola and a path to embedding Aboriginal knowledges. Higher Education Research & Development, 41(6), 1931–1945. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1962810

33.

Kennedy

Howlett

Voyer

Seini

(2024). Moolawang Ngayagang Yanba: Developing relationships with Lake Illawarra and the South Coast. Arctic Review on Law and Politics, 15(1), 180–201. https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v15.6301

34.

Kennedy

Percy

Thomas

Moyle

Delahunty

(2023). Holding space for an Aboriginal approach towards curriculum reconciliation in an Australian university. In Hayes

Luckett

Misiaszek

(Eds), Possibilities and complexities of decolonising higher education (pp. 174–190). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2021.1953979

35.

Kennedy

Thomas

Percy

Avena

Dean

Harden-Thew

Delahunty

de Laat

(2019). Jindaola, an aboriginal way for curriculum development. In Peters

Heraud

(Eds), Encyclopedia of educational innovation (pp. 1–9). Springer.

36.

Kennedy

Thomas

Percy

Delahunty

Harden-Thew

Martin

De Laat

Dean

(2018). Jindaola: An Aboriginal way of embedding knowledges and perspectives. University of Wollongong.

37.

Larkin

Hobbs

(2022). Closing the gap refresh: Incorporating First Nations Voices in Policy Design. Australia and New Zealand School of Government, John L. Alford Case Library: Canberra.

38.

Maritz

Foley

(2018). Expanding Australian indigenous entrepreneurship education ecosystems. Administrative Sciences, 8(20), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci8020020

39.

McKinley

(2013). Postcolonialism, indigenous students, and science education. In Lederman

Zeidler

Lederman

(Eds), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 199–226). Routledge.

40.

Moreau

M. J.

(1979). A structural approach to social work practice. Canadian Journal of Social Work Education, 5(1), 78–94. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/pdf/41670012.pdf

41.

Moreton-Robinson

(2009). Imagining the good Indigenous citizen: Race war and the pathology of patriarchal white sovereignty. Cultural Studies Review, 15(2), 61–79. https://search.informit.org/doi/pdf/10.3316/informit.699352291848041

42.

Mowaljarlai

Malnic

(1993). Yorro Yorro: spirit of the Kimberley. Magabala Books .

43.

New South Wales Ministry of Health. (2020). The NSW Aboriginal mental health and wellbeing Strategy 2020-2025. NSW Ministry of Health.

44.

Ngaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women’s Council. (2003). Ngangkar̲i work - An̲angu way: traditional healers of central Australia. Ngaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women's Council.

45.

Ngaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjar Yankunytjatjara Women’s Council Aboriginal Corporation. (2013). Traditional healers of central Australia: Ngangkari. Magabala Books.

46.

Nikidehaghani

(2024). Accounting and neoliberal responsibilisation: A case study on the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 37(9), 128–159. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-01-2023-6250

47.

Parolin

Pintro-Schmitt

Esping-Andersen

Fallesen

(2025). Intergenerational persistence of poverty in five high-income countries. Nature Human Behaviour, 9(2), 254–267. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02029-w

48.

Prehn

(2025). An Indigenous strengths-based theoretical framework. Australian Social Work, 78(2), 145–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2024.2340464

49.

Prince-Llewellyn

McCarthy

(2025). Walking and talking for well-being: Exploring the effectiveness of walk and talk therapy. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 25(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12847

50.

Productivity Commission. (2017). National Disability Insurance Scheme [NDIS] costs: Study report. Australian Federal Government.

51.

Raman

(2024). Sense of belonging. In Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life and well-being research (pp. 6308–6310). Springer International Publishing.

52.

Revell

McLeod

(2017). Therapists’ experience of walk and talk therapy: A descriptive phenomenological study. European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling, 19(3), 267–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642537.2017.1348377

53.

Rodat

(2020). Empathy and active listening in the humanistic social work. In Voinea

Strungă

(Eds), Research terminals in the social sciences (pp. 9–25). SITECH Publishing House.

54.

Sargent

Williams

R. A.

Hagerty

Lynch-Sauer

Hoyle

(2002). Sense of belonging as a buffer against depressive symptoms. Journal of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association, 8(4), 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1067/mpn.2002.127290

55.

Schafte

Bruna

(2023). The influence of intergenerational trauma on epigenetics and obesity in Indigenous populations. Epigenetics, 18(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15592294.2023.2260218

56.

Sveiby

K. E.

Skuthorpe

(2006). Treading lightly: The hidden wisdom of the world’s oldest people. Allen & Unwin.

57.

Sykes

R. B.

(1984). Incentive, achievement and community: An analysis of Black viewpoints on issues relating to Black Australian education. Harvard University.

58.

Tedeschi

R. G.

Calhoun

L. G.

(2004). Posttraumatic growth: Conceptual foundations and empirical evidence. Psychological Inquiry, 15(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1501_01

59.

Thompson

Duthie

(2016). Cultural awareness, sensitivity and safety: Refocussing social work interventions in Indigenous affairs. Journal of Australian Indigenous Issues, 19(4), 2–25. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.198552960353831

60.

Thorpe

Yashadhana

Biles

Munro-Harrison

Kingsley

(2023). Indigenous health and connection to country. In McQueen

(Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of global public health. Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190632366.013.436

61.

Tunstill

Blewett

(2015). Mapping the journey: Outcome-focused practice and the role of interim outcomes in family support services. Child & Family Social Work, 20(2), 234–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12073

62.

Tustonja

Stipić

D. T.

Skoko

Čuljak

Vegar

(2024). Active listening—A model of empathetic communication in the helping professions. Medicina Academica Integrativa, 1(1), 42–47. https://doi.org/10.47960/3029-3316.2024.1.1.42

63.

Ungunmerr-Baumann

(2002). Dadirri: A reflection by Miriam-rose Ungunmerr Baumann. Australia: Emmaus Productions. https://www.dadirri.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Dadirri-Inner-Deep-Listening-M-R-Ungunmerr-Bauman-Refl1.pdf.

64.

United Nations General Assembly. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [Resolution A/RES/61/295].

65.

Walsh

Anthony

Beilby

McNamara

Quilter

(2025). ‘Back off! Stop making us illegal!’: The criminalisation of homelessness in Australia. Social & Legal Studies, 34(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639241244953

66.

Wardlaw

(2021). Lack of accountability, transparency and trust by the former Minister and the Agency. Submission to Government, 21 June 2021. http://www.janewardlaw.com.au/uploads/1/2/3/3/12331947/ndia_submission_independent_assessments.pdf.

67.

Watt

Morgan

Stanley

Luscombe

Srikanth

(2025). A descriptive analysis of Aboriginal adolescents admitted to a regional inpatient mental health unit: Was culture considered? Australasian Psychiatry, 33(1), 45–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/10398562241292967

68.

Webb

S. A.

(2009). Against difference and diversity in social work: The case of human rights. International Journal of Social Welfare, 18(3), 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2397.2009.00659.x

69.

Wolfe

(2006). Settler colonialism and the elimination of the native. Journal of Genocide Research, 8(4), 387–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623520601056240

70.

Yabang

Manning

E. E.

Mate

K. E.

Endacott

S. K.

Cameron

G. J.

(2025). Indigenous student engagement in science: A case study addressing the lack of diversity and equity in biomedical science and pharmacy research for Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people. Immunology and Cell Biology, 103(3), 256–264. https://doi.org/10.1111/imcb.70007

71.

Yehuda

Lehrner

(2018). Intergenerational transmission of trauma effects: Putative role of epigenetic mechanisms. World Psychiatry, 17(3), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20568

72.

Yunkaporta

(2023). Aboriginal pedagogy: Integrity in academic and cultural practice. Holistic Education Review, 3(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/979-8-88730-667-420251005

73.

Yunkaporta

Moodie

(2021). Thought ritual: An Indigenous data analysis method for research. Indigenous Knowledges: Privileging Our Voices, 11(1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004461642_006

74.

Yunkaporta

Shillingsworth

(2020). Relationally responsive standpoint. Journal of Indigenous Research, 8(2020), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.26077/ky71-qt27