Monday, October 21, 2019

Identifying The Experience Of Child Protection Issues Social Work Essay Essays

Identifying The Experience Of Child Protection Issues Social Work Essay Essays Identifying The Experience Of Child Protection Issues Social Work Essay Essay Identifying The Experience Of Child Protection Issues Social Work Essay Essay who were removed from their households for assorted grounds, were denied the basic right of all kids to have protection, support and loving attention ( FAHCSIA ) . Today, the Australian Government is committed to larning from its history and bettering the quality of life experience by our kids and immature people. The Australian Government and the non-government sector recognize that households are the cardinal system that supports and nurtures our kids and immature people. There is a national committedness to supply child-centred, family-focused responses as the most effectual manner to assist kids and immature people who are disadvantaged, neglected or abused, or at hazard of going so in ulterior life. 2.1 The Issue As of June 2010, there were 24, 279 kids populating in Out of Home Care. Of these, 11, 468 of these kids were of Indigenous or Torres Strait Islander decent, doing them 9 times more likely to be in Out of Home Care so non-Indigenous kids ( 44.8 in every thousand compared with 4.9 in every 1000 ) 0 ( FAHCSIA ) . Harmonizing to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Indigenous Australian kids are 8 times more likely than non-Indigenous kids to hold been involved with Child Protection services and experience remotion orders. The arrangement of kids in Out of Home Care is widely recognised as the most terrible signifier of kid public assistance intercessions. Autochthonal kids are non merely more likely to be placed in Out of Home Care, but to come in attention at a younger age and to stay in attention longer than other kids. ( SNAIIC ) Disregard is the most common ground for Indigenous kids to be removed from their households, with 37.5 % of Autochthonal kids in the system is due to pretermit ( Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2010 ) . 2.2. Children in Care In the yesteryear when Autochthonal kids were removed from their households they were by and large placed with Non-Indigenous carers or insitutions. These kids were cut off from their households and were forced to absorb into non-Indigenous Australian civilization. This has had an improbably detrimental consequence on the development of the Indigenous kids involved and their households, doing what is by and large known as the Stolen Generation . When Autochthonal kids are placed in the attention of non-indigenous people, despite the good purposes and positive environment of the Care-givers, the Indigenous kids doubtless suffer in their cultural development and individuality, which can do reunion hard, if non impossible, due to relational and individuality issues it causes between the kid and their birth household ( and community ) . Unfortunately, small to no research has been done on the effects of Autochthonal kids in Out of Home attention. The SNAICC have put forward recommendations that comparings and ratings be done on the assorted experience of Autochthonal kids in Out of Home Care ( 2011 ) . The Policy In an effort to diminish the injury that Autochthonal kids and their households experience when the kids are placed in Out of Home Care, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle ( Australian Human Rights Commission, 2008 ) was accepted in 1986 by all of Australia. However, it was non until about 10 old ages subsequently that the Principle transitioned from simply policy to go legislative pattern ( Child Protection Peak, LTD. ) The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle states the order in which it is preferred for Autochthonal kids to be placed once they are removed from their households: Their drawn-out households The kid s autochthonal community Other Autochthonal people If none of the above can be arranged, merely so will an Autochthonal kid go to a non-Indigenous Carer ( Australian Human Rights Commission, 2008 ) The Principle acknowledges that the old policies on assimilation caused agony to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. It reflects the right of Autochthonal people to raise their kids in their ain civilization and maintain them as a portion of their communities ( Australian Human Rights Commission, 2008 ) . Childs that are placed in one of the three preferred options are described as being placed in conformity with the rule ( Australian Human Rights Commission, 2008 ) . In Australia in 2009-10, 70.5 % of Autochthonal kids who were placed in Out of Home Care were put in a preferable arrangement under the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle such as with drawn-out household, other Autochthonal health professionals or in Autochthonal residential environment. The Principle besides requires that an Autochthonal administration or bureau be involved in the determination as to where to put the kid. In some legal power, the drawn-out household of the kid is besides involved in the determination ( SNAICC, 2011 ) . If a kid can non be placed with Autochthonal carers, so the Principle requires that every attempt be made for the kid to keep connexion with their household, linguistic communication and civilization ( SNAICC, 2011 ) . Literature reappraisal For the intent of this study, information on the experience of Indigenous and Torres Strait Islander kids with Out of Home Foster attention was gathered from assorted equal reviewed articles, authorities and non-government studies. Though it must be noted that non all available stuff was researched due to time-constraints, the undermentioned information pertain to the beginnings used to inform this study: Many of the articles and studies focus to a great extent on the quantitative informations that represents and informs the statistics of Autochthonal kids in attention and for the assorted grounds for this happening. All articles, particularly those written by Indigenous organisations, see the Principle as a acknowledgment of the racialist attitudes held by past Australian Governments policies that removed Autochthonal kids from their households and into the places of Non-Indigenous, white Australians. Many of the beginnings believe the ground why there is such a high figure of Autochthonal kids in attention is, in a sense, a fall-out of the Stolen Generation ; the kids of the Stolen Generation were so traumatised that, now they are grownups, they can non rear their ain kids. A study done by the SNAICC in 2011 calls for comparative research to be done in the experience of Autochthonal kids in the assorted surrogate scenes. None of the literature disagreed with the Principle, merely that it can non be placed above the precedence to maintain the kid safe ( SNAICC, 2011 ) . The literature focused more on why Children are in attention, instead than how to forestall this and rehabilitate the parents who be traumatized by the Stolen Generation. Evaluation Harmonizing to the SNAICC, The Child Placement Principle is extremely important to Indigenous peoples for a figure of single, but connected, grounds: 1.In regard to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander kids, execution of the Principle provides the chance for these kids to keep a strong connexion to their extended household and community which is an of import factor in the kid developing a healthy and culturally relevant sense of individuality and well-being. 2. The SNAICC believe that the Principle was contrary to and discredits the thought that was the foundation for the policies of segregation and cultural assimilation held by the Australian Governments in old ages gone by. 3. It is possible that the psychological benefits of a kids being placed with members of their ain household or members of their ain culture/community is applicable to all kids in general. This could be specifically of import to kids of other civilizations populating within Australia In a qualitative study conducted by the Association of Children s Welfare Agencies NSW ( ACWA, 2004 ) , this sensed psychological benefit was the figure one ground spring by comparative carers for looking after a kid from their ain family- They re your ain flesh and blood one respondent was recorded as stating. It is besides seen as less traumatic for the kid to be placed in kin attention, as the people they are being placed with are people they place with, person they know .and experience comfy with . A strong sense of household duty was besides recognised in the study as a benefit of Family attention ( ACWA, 2004 ) The strong support for household or family attention for Autochthonal kids can besides be seen by the common position of many Autochthonal people that alternative signifiers of surrogate attention were flawed and potentially detrimental to the kids s development. One respondent to the study said that I think our history of other signifiers of alternate attention is black ( ACWA, 2004 ) . This is in mention to the Stolen Generations ( Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, 1997 as cited by ACWA, 2004 ) . 4.1 As mentioned antecedently, 70.5 % of Autochthonal kids are placed harmonizing to Principle . While this can be seen as a success compared to the old policies that affected the Stolen Generation, it is of import to discourse the other 29.5 % that are with non-Indigenous carers. This is chiefly due to the deficiency of Autochthonal carers in the Foster attention system. Some suggest that there are three chief grounds for this deficit: Trauma associated with the Stolen Generation has rendered some Autochthonal people incapable of looking after kids The hesitance of some Autochthonal people to be associated with the Welfare system in visible radiation of old public assistance policies and experience There are significantly more Autochthonal kids than there are Autochthonal grownups. Foster Agencies so hold much work to make in order to accommodate themselves with the Indigenous community. It besides increases their duty to the 29.5 % to guarantee sufficient and effectual cultural plans are available and utilized by the non-Indigenous carers and their Autochthonal Foster kids. 4.3 Whilst the SNAICC clearly support the Principle and believe that kids maintain connexions with their household and community is critical, they are concerned that the safety of Indigenous kids has non been discussed in recent treatments on the Principle. Whilst maintaining civilization is of import, it is neer more so than the safety of a kid placed in Out of Home attention. Puting a kid in the attention of a household member or their community merely to adhere to the Principle can neer be a justification for go forthing or seting the kid at hazard ( Berlyn, Bromfield A ; Lamont, 2011 ) . Decision As of June 2010, 47 % of kids in Out of Home Care we Indigenous kids. This makes Autochthonal kids 9 times more likely to be in attention than non-Indigenous kids. The highest ground for kids to be removed from their parents is neglect. Due to the history of the Autochthonal people, specifically in respects to the Stolen Generation and the policies that informed it, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle was introduced to maintain Autochthonal Children within their households, community or civilization in order to advance positive cultural individuality and better familial dealingss. Presently, merely 70.5 % of Autochthonal kids in attention are placed harmonizing to the Principle. More demands to be done to enroll Indigenous Foster carers and to efficaciously cut down the figure of Autochthonal kids traveling into attention.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.