Karin Fisher

Issue addressed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples' holistic concepts of wellbeing are inadequately represented in the health promotion discourse. The aim of this article was to explore what sustains an Aboriginal wellbeing program, to inform critical reflection and reorientation to empower Aboriginal wellbeing approaches in health promotion practice and policy. Methods Aboriginal and non‐Indigenous researchers collaboratively designed a critically framed, strengths‐based research approach with Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Service staff and wellbeing program participants. Data from Individual Yarning ( n = 15) with program participants and staff inspired co‐researchers to co‐develop interpretations over two half‐day Collaborative Yarning sessions ( n = 9). Results Co‐researchers depicted five lifeworld qualities that sustain an Aboriginal wellbeing program: love, connection, respect, culture and belonging. The lifeworld qualities are relational, communicative and involve the dynamics of identity, power and self‐determination. Conclusions The five qualities support a lifeworld approach to an Aboriginal wellbeing program, opening communicative and relational opportunities to mediate culturally responsive interactions. The qualities mediated interactions between people in the lifeworld including program participants and coordinators, and systems representatives including health service providers. A lifeworld approach provides a way to empower Aboriginal self‐determination and leadership through embedment of cultural determinants of health in wellbeing programs. So what? Health service providers and policy makers can use lifeworld approaches to guide critical reflection and reorient practice and policy related to Aboriginal health. The lifeworld qualities that encompass this approach in wellbeing programs are communicative and relational, centred on local community voices and co‐produced with community for Aboriginal identity, empowerment and self‐determination.

Objective To explore the lived experience of people with a physical disability residing in a rural area and receiving services under the NDIS. Setting Rural areas of New South Wales classified as Modified Monash Categories 3–7. Participants Semistructured interviews were conducted with seven purposively sampled participants who self‐identified as having a physical disability, were receiving NDIS funding and lived in a rural area of NSW. Design Data collection and analysis were guided by hermeneutic phenomenology. Findings We interpreted three interrelated themes; Uncertainty of Access , Battling Bureaucracy and Improving Relationships and Independence. The themes articulate the essence of this phenomenon, Challenges to choice and control . Discussion The findings of this study suggest that while people with a physical disability living in rural NSW acknowledged positive changes to their everyday lives through the NDIS, there remains a sense of confusion, frustration and disconnection with the system. Burdensome, inconsistent and untimely communication with NDIS staff caused uncertainty with the process and required negotiation to resolve issues such as delays in funding, essential services or equipment modifications. The essence of Challenges to choice and control articulates what the person had to negotiate within their lifeworld. Further guidance and clarity for people with disabilities to access the NDIS system would ensure confidence to navigate the system and receive the essential supports they need.

Objective The objective of this study was to explore data and Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal researchers' experiences and reflexivity in co‐designing research about a rural Aboriginal well‐being program to inform practice and policy. Setting Gumbaynggirr, Birpai, Kamilaroi and Awabakal countries located in regional and rural New South Wales, Australia. Participants Rural and regionally located research team who co‐designed processes to challenge the status quo about a critically framed, rural‐based Aboriginal well‐being research project. Design Researchers drew on data from a research project in an interpretive cycle of collaborative Yarning. Data included 90 published articles, 12 Yarning transcripts and 26 reflective journal text sets, as well as researcher experiences and reflexivity. Results The Duguula Gayirray (Yarning together), Yandaarray (walking together) and Duguula Nguraljili (sharing together) co‐design practice model was developed to represent key actions in the context of an Aboriginal well‐being program in a rural context. Actions were supported by seven interpersonal ways of being and were underpinned by respectful relationships between community and researchers. Discussion Duguula Gayirray, Yandaarray and Duguula Nguraljili are critical to co‐design practice and are grounded in respectful relationships. Our experiences led us to critique our perceptions of power sharing, equitable partnerships and collaborative knowledges towards opportunity for collective research co‐design. Conclusion Duguula Gayirray, Yandaarray and Duguula Nguraljili transformed our understanding of achieving liberation from dominant western research in the context of a rurally located Australian Aboriginal well‐being program. This study contributes to progression of Aboriginal health research practice and policy recommendations, enabling real cultural change in health care with rurally located Aboriginal communities.