Number of children needing protection 'has tripled'
Posted
Updated
The biggest increase in the number of notifications was in New South Wales. (ABC News: file photo)
New research shows state governments have failed to put in place appropriate child protection measures despite a sharp rise in the number of children needing protection from violent and sexual abuse in the last 10 years.
A report from the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) has found that since 1997, the number of children needing protection - mostly from violent and drug-addicted parents - has more than tripled nationally to more than 300,000.
While this was based on both substantiated and unsubstantiated child-protection notifications, the number of substantiated notifications also increased dramatically - almost doubling from 29,833 to 58,563.
The biggest increase in the number of notifications (substantiated and unsubstantiated) was in New South Wales, where the figure in 1995-96 was 28,930 and the corresponding figure in 2006-07 was 189,928.
The group is using the report to call for the creation of a federal children's commissioner to complement the work of commissioners that already exist in most states and territories.
One of the report author's, James McDougall, says little has been done to prevent children suffering at the hands of abusive and violent parents.
"There's been a hell of a lot of concerns around prosecutions and notifications, but in terms of good public policy development it's become fairly clear to us that what we've missed out on doing is that ensuring children are actually protected in that process," he said.
He says it shows a lack of appropriate early intervention polices, a problem that could be addressed by the creation of a federal commissioner position.
"We now have a commissioner in almost every state and territory and that position is able to draw attention to these areas of deficiencies in terms of public policy," he said.
"That clearly is needed at a national level as well."
The report also calls for more support programs for parents with drug or alcohol problems, as well as mental health assistance for children.
Search for news
Comments (14)
Comments for this story are closed. No new comments can be added. If you would like to have your say on this issue, you can do so via the Emails section of our Opinion pages.
-
Green:
03 Oct 2008 12:59:19pm
On this note, it's good to see agreement amongst our governments that Centrelink should help state child protection agencies to keep track of at-risk families who move interstate. Hopefully this will reduce the number of children needing help who are currently falling through the net when their families move interstate.
Its a step in the right direction, but we still need to do far more to protect those who need protecting.Agree (1) Alert moderator
-
Carol:
03 Oct 2008 1:18:07pm
Agreed. There are some benefits of having a Federal Govt of the same political party as the majority of states. This is one of them.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gavin:
03 Oct 2008 1:40:33pm
If they are trying to shift the problem onto Centrelink it is only so the Govt can offload their responsibility.
There are plenty of people who have no interaction with Centrelink and their children may be left unprotected.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
muzz:
03 Oct 2008 1:14:33pm
The reality that 300,000 children are seen to be at risk is an astounding number. Are we failing as a society that such an event occurs or are we a better society because we are able to identify and try to respond to this shameful situation. Either way it is obvious that there is "something rotten in the garden shed".
It is true that many or most of these high need members of our society do not get a good deal from birth through to their end. Many will spend their lives as inmates of our psych hospital and jails. Many will die early as a result of violence and drug misuse. Most will have their own children.
On Tuesday this website ran the story "Toddlers' mental health may need check-up" which called for improved mental health servcies for young children.
Perhaps it is our traumatic colonial past where prisoners were transported from other parts, where Aboriginal people were invaded, where brutal punishment models of care were employed to help people to get over their problems.
There is an overwhelming body of evidence that the social determinants of health are critical in how our society moves forward or backwards. Many people can see that poverty and disadvantage begets more of the same. There are some serious lessons to be learnt here.
The mad cap pursuit of wealth as a measure of success is becoming outdated. Jobs are important in that they help us give meaning to our lives. As the world economy contracts and the poorer nations develop their incomes we need to be seriously looking at what development will support our society in becoming the truly "civil society" that meets all of our basic needs. Today, if 300,000 are at risk, we need to examine and take action on what it is that we do well and what it is that we do not do well. Advance Australia Fair..maybeAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
Brad:
03 Oct 2008 1:15:55pm
I would disagree that the number has tripled. I think the number has always been this high, but was hidden or unreported.
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gavin:
03 Oct 2008 1:44:37pm
I agree with you.
Two thirds of adults I know that are over the age of 50 have been the victim of sexual abuse.
We also must never forget to never allow physical abuse against children to be legalised like the Family First Party tried to do in South Australia last year.
Family First tried to pass legislation that would allow parents to physically abuse their children.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
twobob:
03 Oct 2008 2:07:56pm
Two thirds of the people you know who are over 50 have been sexually abused? Wow I wonder if thats two out of three people or is at all representative of the real number, somehow I doubt it.
I detest family first and wonder very much if you have put this post here to draw attention to them. Smacking a child who is too young to be reasoned with is not abuse Gavin. Your pretty sensationist mate most of us are reasonable people and dont go overboard with such things.
But I would however contend that the baby bonus has contributed to this. Thanks costello we really needed a bunch of abused underprivileged kids to be the bottom feeding slaves for our social liberal elitists.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
-
SG:
03 Oct 2008 1:32:22pm
Five years from now, the number of notifications will have doubled again. The death rate among children at risk will have trebled and state governments will be funding group homes because there will be no foster care.
The welfare of the children continues to come a very poor second to the welfare of the dysfunctional birth parent. While state governments (and the very leftist elements of academia) cling to the notion that all birth parents can be responsible if only the state provides appropriate support, these kids will continue to suffer, and nothing will change. It will instead, just continue getting much worse amid the pseudo hand wringing and claims of "we're fixing it".
No amount of rational argument makes the slightest dent because -
1) All contrary opinion, no matter how valid, is automatically dismissed under the mantra of martyrs for the cause (one of the benefits of living in a bubble of your own rhetoric, there is zero accountability to anyone else).
2) The social work fraternity have absolute control of the sector, control all funding, with evidence-based "research" directions that are heavily biased to support the existing paradigm.
3) State governments don't like taking children into care because it costs money. Leaving them in dangerous situations is economically convenient.
You can appoint as many federal commissioners as you like (aren't we good, we are ACTING, we have created another public service job for one of our PC mates who thinks just like us), but that also won't make the slightest difference, because you are not dealing with a personnel problem. You are dealing with an ideology problem, an accountability problem and a sector that is driven by very flawed philosophy. Fix that and you fix the problem.
Huff and puff in the meantime, nothing will change. It will only get worse unless someone bites the bullet and calls it like it is.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
angela:
03 Oct 2008 2:08:46pm
I am one of your "leftists" in the community sector and you won't get an argument from me that there are lots of lousy parents out there who are doing serious damage to their children (who will do serious damage to their children and so it goes). If I though there were enough functional people out there to replace the dysfunctional parents, and the state was prepared to pay them decent money to develop a life long relationship to heal such damaged children, then I am with you comrade. There aren't , it isn't and they rarely do.
Providing support to dysfunctional birth parents or marginally less dysfunctional extended family members are the best options as a pragmatic less than best solution. Also many foster parents are just plain weird - listen to adult survivors of foster parenting- quite an eye opener. I am seriously disturbed by the damage being done to our most vulnerable children by the lack of money spent on finding better carers for abused children. We also need to do much better at convincing dysfunctional individuals that they need to get their own house in order before becoming parents. As it is- many are so damaged by their own childhoods that they cannot see that what they are dong is wrong, and having children is a completely unconscious decision.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
jh:
03 Oct 2008 2:14:08pm
So when do I drop these thousands of children off at your place? No point calling it 'like it is' until you're prepared to do it like it needs to be done.
I've worked in child protection.
Fact of the matter is that there just are not the places to put children when you rip them out of their homes with the gay abandon you suggest. So unless you're going to raise them yourself, working with the family is the best way to get improvement, and it does work. If you arbitrarily take the child from the family (which at times is necessary in spite of all the best efforts), you know what happens?
They have another one. Better to improve the skills and family environment.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
warren:
03 Oct 2008 1:44:47pm
perhaps the figure isnt indicative of an increase in abuse, rather an increase in the willingness and ability of children and or third parties to actually report these abuses?
Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
Gavin:
03 Oct 2008 1:46:45pm
Please ammend my comment to include this link.
It is related to Family First attempting to legalise child abuse last year.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/18/2062590.htmAgree (0) Alert moderator
-
jh:
03 Oct 2008 2:03:32pm
Good on you Gavin
I quite agree.
BUT if we are not going to sanction or support corporeal punishment of children (I hope we do not), then we must recall that many of the parents out there today WERE raised with corporeal punishment. This means that when under pressure or frustrated, the parents may resort to hitting even if they don't want to, for lack of a realistic alternative. There are lots of far better alternatives but they do not come naturally any more than changing a nappy does. It has to be taught, modelled and learned.
That is why a broad scale roll out of 'assertive discipline/positive relationship development' programs (like Triple P for example), assistance and support are needed to help facilitate such a generational (and for the most part positive) change in attitudes to parenting.
I think DoCS reporting has increased partially as a result of our community's increasing intolerance of child neglect and abuse. So in that sense at least this to the good, now the question is how do we work WITH parents and famiilies to improve family functioning and childrearing practises.Agree (0) Alert moderator
-
-
Gweneth:
03 Oct 2008 2:02:45pm
We will never meet demand while social workers are paid a pittance and budgets reflect not the need but what is acceptable to the gluttonous in our communities. As a teacher I have had to deal with the ripple effects of the abuse. There are nowhere near the services available to meet demand and the only people who put their hand up to do such soul destroying work are quite often damaged themselves and seeking solace in repairing other lives. They burn out quickly and are convenient whipping posts for the self righteous moralists like SG.
The simple fact is that most people don't actually care except when it interferes with their breakfast news reading. They resent any money being spent on those at risk and squeal at the mere suggestion that middle class welfare be diverted to help those in real need.Agree (0) Alert moderator
