What is the problem?
increasing numbers of child protection substantiations
high numbers of Indigenous children who were the subject of a substantiation
high percentage of very young children in the child protection system
increasing numbers of children in out-of home care
Rates of neglect and abuse
There has been a significant increase in reporting to statutory child protection systems across Australia (and internationally) over the past decade. It is difficult to tell from these figures alone the real rate of child neglect or abuse in the Australian community. There is no reliable Australian information about the prevalence of abuse and neglect, and it is generally assumed that fewer cases are reported than are occurring. Increased reporting can reflect mandatory requirements, an increased awareness of signs of abuse, a greater willingness to report, wider definitions of abuse and neglect, or more worryingly, an actual increase in abuse rates.
Regardless of the reasons, of particular concern are:
- increasing numbers of child protection substantiations
- the number of occasions where authorities found that a child either was or was likely to be harmed, abused or neglected increased by 45 per cent from 40,416 in 2002–03 to 58,563 in 2006–07;
- high numbers of Indigenous children who were the subject of a substantiation
- more than five times higher than other children;
- the high percentage of very young children involved in the child protection system
- on average, 65 per cent of children involved in the child protection system across Australia are younger than ten;
- the largest proportion of children admitted to care and protection orders in 2006–07 were between one and four years of age; and
- increasing numbers of children in out-of-home care
- in 2007 there were 28,441 children in out-of-home care, double the number of 10 years ago;
- the 7,892 Indigenous children in out-of-home care in 2007 is over 8 times the rate for other children.3
Notifications of suspected child abuse and neglect have more than doubled in the last eight years and have increased in most jurisdictions across the last year. Substantiations (where after investigation it is concluded that the child has been harmed or is at risk of harm) also increased in most jurisdictions over the last eight years and increased in a number of jurisdictions in the last year. This may reflect improved reporting and investigation arrangements in some jurisdictions.
Number of notifications and substantiations received from 1999–00 to 2006–07
Source: Child protection Australia 2006–07, AIHW
Four out of five reports on average across Australia are not substantiated. Reporting is an important part of the child protection systems but measures that simply increase reporting are not always beneficial. International research suggests that for those families subject to an unsubstantiated investigation, the fear, anger and shame they experience can lead them to use fewer universal and secondary support services than prior to the investigation. Some commentators suggest that drawing more children and families into the statutory child protection system will not improve outcomes and indeed comes with significant risks.4
The safety of children rightly generates significant public interest and focuses attention on the performance of child protection systems. All State and Territory jurisdictions have experienced increases in demand for child protection services in recent years, and significant resources and policy attention have been invested by these governments to tackle the problem. Greater involvement from the Australian Government in more coordinated approaches and better alignment of investments in prevention and early intervention could help improve outcomes for children.
Staff at the frontline of child protection systems face extraordinary pressure and must cope with very challenging situations. Increased activity in a child protection system inevitably places increased burdens and strain on staff. Many jurisdictions report difficulty attracting sufficient numbers of appropriately qualified personnel, which can in turn result in more pressure being placed on relatively inexperienced social and welfare workers who must undertake case assessments and identify the core of serious, high risk cases.
All State and Territory jurisdictions have experienced increases in demand for child protection services in recent years, and significant resources and policy attention have been invested by these governments to tackle the problem.
Greater involvement from the Australian Government in more coordinated approaches and better alignment of investments in prevention and early intervention could help improve outcomes for children.
Types of neglect and abuse
While the types of neglect or abuse reported to child protection authorities can vary significantly, all cause harm to children. There is no standard definition of child abuse or neglect across states and territories. Statistical collection by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) groups types of substantiated abuse or neglect into four broad categories: neglect, emotional abuse, sexual abuse, and physical abuse. Increasingly, the families involved in child protection are facing long term issues such as low income, sole parenthood, substance or alcohol abuse, or mental disability. This is lifting the proportion of cases of a more chronic nature. Addressing the problems, or at least enabling the families to better cope with the problems, requires more flexible responses and sustained support.
It has been suggested that the regulatory approach to child abuse (through the statutory child protection system) is highly effective in identifying and responding to significant harm, which is particularly appropriate for cases of a more episodic nature (such as some cases of sexual abuse or severe physical abuse). It is less effective, however, for cases of a more chronic nature, such as neglect and emotional abuse which are now the most commonly substantiated maltreatment types.5
Differences across jurisdictions are more likely to reflect differences in definition, standards and reporting rather than significant variations in prevalence of any types across the wider community.
Neglect and emotional abuse are now the most commonly substantiated maltreatment types.
Source: Child protection Australia 2006–07, AIHW
The cost of neglect and abuse
Child abuse and neglect can have a life-changing effect on individuals, and many carry trauma with them for a long time, even their whole lives. While many survivors are able to rebuild their lives, there can be many hurdles to overcome. Children who are subjected to abuse or neglect may experience fear and bodily harm, poor school performance, learning disorders, poor peer relations, antisocial behaviour and mental health disorders. Emotional abuse and neglect is associated with increased anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, and physical symptoms, as well as lifetime trauma exposure. A history of child sexual abuse has been associated with psychopathology, depression, anxiety disorder, phobias, panic disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse and violent and sexual offending later in life. The intergenerational effects of child abuse and neglect mean that problems can repeat themselves, and the cycle continues.
Not only does child abuse and neglect exact a devastating personal toll, the financial costs to the Australian community are significant. In 2003, it was estimated that the direct costs of child abuse and neglect in Australia alone were $4.9 billion per annum in 2001–026, and this excludes the longer term costs to our community of lost productivity and high service needs by adults who have grown up with poor education, health and social outcomes. Governments at all levels have made it clear that building strong, healthy, well functioning individuals, families and communities is a key priority. The social and economic benefits that result from investing in good quality early childhood and child abuse prevention programs can be maximised by consolidated national action.
Child abuse and neglect exact a devastating personal toll. The financial costs to the Australian community are also significant. In 2003, it was estimated that the direct costs of child abuse and neglect in Australia alone were $4.9 billion per annum.
Child abuse is a criminal issue
Fundamentally, the abuse of children is a crime. Regardless of the relationship of the perpetrator to the victim, physical or sexual abuse of children will require a criminal justice response. A continued focus on improving the criminal justice response to child abuse such as more effective investigations and increased prosecutions is one element of a comprehensive approach to protecting children and preventing the occurrence or recurrence of abuse or neglect. Statutory child protection services must be able to respond in cases where the child is not being protected, and these interventions work most effectively when accompanied by a range of services to support victims and their families, and to rehabilitate offenders.
A focus on crises, rather than causes
Many service providers, research bodies, and key stakeholders repeatedly identify the need to move beyond only managing the crisis end of child protection, and to focus on the issues that are driving these increases. Child abuse and neglect cannot be easily disentangled from individual, family and community issues such as poverty, homelessness, drug and alcohol addiction, domestic violence, mental health issues and social isolation. Understanding the ways these factors inter-relate and developing strong connected solutions requires the effort and attention of all levels of government, the nongovernment sector and the broader community. It also requires government to clearly articulate its expectations of parents and families, and to develop tools to ensure parents and families can take responsibility for the care of their children.
Primary interventions are those universal services, programs and payments available to all children and families.
Secondary (or early) interventions are specifically targeted to prevent child abuse and neglect by identifying and reducing the personal and social stresses on parents that lead to family breakdown and/or child abuse and neglect.
Tertiary interventions operate at the crisis end and respond to children who have been harmed or are at risk of harm.
In an optimally functioning system, the greatest investment would be in primary and secondary responses to help ensure that children and families are in healthy safe homes and are not exposed to the risks of abuse or neglect.
Using a public health model, the key interventions to prevent the occurrence or reccurrence of abuse can be broadly categorised as primary, secondary and tertiary interventions aimed at keeping children safe.
Primary interventions are those universal services, programs and payments available to all children and families. They include (but are not limited to) health services (antenatal, maternal and child services and Medicare), early childhood development (playgroups and other structured-learning environments for very young children, child care, pre-school and school education), and financial support (family assistance and income support payments).
The goal of primary services is to support the wellbeing of all children and families. Primary services can be used to help prevent abuse and neglect occurring. Typically, primary interventions are delivered at both the Commonwealth and State and Territory Government levels, and involve direct service provision through government entities and by third parties (community organisations).
Secondary (or early) interventions are specifically targeted to prevent child abuse and neglect by identifying and reducing the personal and social stresses on parents that lead to family breakdown and/or child abuse and neglect. They are targeted at individuals and families that need additional support or are working to overcome significant problems. The services can include in-home family support, financial or family counselling, respite care, various parenting and self-help groups and intensive supported playgroups for young children at risk and their parents. Adult-focussed services directed at specific parental problems such as drug and alcohol abuse, mental health disorders and family violence may also act as secondary interventions by assisting parents to protect vulnerable children. Secondary interventions are delivered at both the Australian Government and State and Territory Government levels, and involve provision by third parties.
Tertiary interventions operate at the crisis end and respond to children who have been harmed or are at risk of harm. Tertiary interventions include assessments and responses to child protection notifications, foster, relative and kinship care and other out-of-home care options for children who have been at risk of significant harm, where intervention is needed to ensure the ongoing safety of the child. These services include police and the legal system (child and youth courts and family law systems), and the statutory child protection services and placement services for children who are unable to live at home. Tertiary interventions are provided by State and Territory Governments.
In an optimally functioning system, the greatest investment would be in primary and secondary responses to help ensure that children and families are in healthy safe homes and are not exposed to the risks of abuse or neglect. Tertiary interventions are the most costly and the most difficult in terms of achieving positive outcomes for children and families.
It is important that all levels of interventions are well coordinated to maximise the efficiency and effectiveness of interventions by reducing overlap and addressing gaps. There is considerable potential in Australia to improve collaboration within and between governments and with non-government providers of services.
The Australian Government is examining how its programs and policies could better support the goal of keeping children safe. While State and Territory Governments have statutory responsibility for child protection, the Australian Government also interacts with families in a range of situations at the primary and secondary intervention levels, and to a lesser extent at the tertiary level. These interactions should be demonstrating that they are strengthening families and helping prevent neglect or abuse.
Information and data limitations
There is a lot we still do not know and are not able to understand because of differences in the ways jurisdictions collect data.
The Australian Government supports child protection data collection and research, including through funding the annual report Child protection Australia through the AIHW; the National Child Protection Clearinghouse, through the Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) and the Australian Centre for Child Protection through the University of South Australia. However, there is a lot we still do not know and are not able to understand because of differences in the ways jurisdictions collect and report data. For example, national child protection data does not currently include information on children with disabilities so the extent of abuse or neglect relating to this vulnerable group is not quantifiable.
There are differences between States and Territories that affect the national comparability of the data on children on care and protection orders and children in outof- home care, but the differences between jurisdictions are greatest in relation to child protection notifications, investigations and substantiations. These data differences are driven by State and Territory legislation and are a consequence of having eight different child protection systems across the nation.
The AIHW and the Productivity Commission have both called for more consistent information and performance measures for child protection and wellbeing. Work is currently being undertaken by the AIHW’s National Child Protection and Support Services data group to broaden the scope of the national data collection and to improve comparability. However more could be done to harmonise at least some core data and information items.
Other than the administrative data from State and Territory child protection systems published in the AIHW Child protection Australia report, there is no accurate information available about the number of children in Australia who have experienced abuse or neglect. National prevalence studies that could collect this kind of information through a nationally representative survey have not been conducted in Australia.
High numbers of children in care and concerns about out-of-home care
More children going into care has also meant that greater numbers of foster carers are required — but the pool of potential foster carers is decreasing.
“Numerous international and national studies have documented the poor outcomes commonly experienced by young people leaving State care including higher rates of homelessness; use of drugs and alcohol; predisposition to mental health problems; poor educational and employment outcomes; poor social support systems and social isolation; juvenile prostitution; early parenthood and involvement in criminal activities7.”
Child and Family Welfare Association of Australia (CAFWAA)
Between 1996 and 2007, the number of children in out-of-home care in Australia increased by 104 per cent from 13,979 children in June 1996 to 28,441 children in June 2007. In 2007, 94.6 per cent of these children were living with relatives, foster carers or in some other home-based arrangement — rather than in facilities such as family group homes or residential care.
Children in out-of-home care, by living arrangements, States and Territories, at 30 June 2007
Source: Child protection Australia 2006–07, AIHW
Public concern has increased about the safety and wellbeing of children in care, in light of a number of investigations and reviews which have reported on inappropriate or unstable care arrangements. More children going into care has also meant that greater numbers of foster carers are required — against strong evidence that the pool of potential foster carers is decreasing. Foster carers are also now more likely to have more children in their care and themselves to be on low incomes. The number of Indigenous children requiring out-of-home care is three times the number of approved Indigenous carers. Support for foster carers can directly affect the quality of care for children and young people.
Additionally, there is a question of the adequacy of support for children and young people after leaving care. Transition services are those which support young people who are leaving out-of-home care, and they are delivered at both the Commonwealth and State and Territory Government levels, as well as by community organisations. Depending on the age of the child and the exit point, this transition can be complex involving education, accommodation, and employment options as well as emotional and financial support as young people become independent. There has been concern across the system about poor outcomes for these children and young people.
In their recently released “Report Card, Transitioning from Care”8, CREATE Foundation has reviewed progress by governments and agencies in supporting vulnerable young people who have been in care. The report includes the results of CREATE’s national survey in 2007 of young people who have left care. The report concludes that while legislation and policies seem to be in place to support young people’s successful transition from care, the uneven implementation of these policies is failing them.
Critical issues for Indigenous children
Indigenous children continue to be overrepresented in child protection systems.
The factors which contribute to family and parenting pressures are more marked in many Indigenous households — economic disadvantage, extreme housing stress and overcrowding, excessive alcohol consumption, grief and trauma, health and mental health issues.
The safety of Indigenous children is an issue of national significance. There have been numerous reports and inquiries which have shown high levels of abuse and neglect in many Indigenous communities. Published AIHW data also shows that Indigenous children continue to be clearly over-represented in child protection systems, with:
- Indigenous children being more than five times more likely than non-Indigenous children to be the subject of a substantiation;
- rates of care and protection orders being more than seven times as high for Indigenous children; and
- rates of out-of-home care being over eight times higher for Indigenous children than for other children.
Despite this over-representation, there is also some evidence that many Indigenous children who may be experiencing abuse or neglect are not always assessed adequately and remain in very concerning situations. The factors which contribute to family and parenting pressures are more marked in many Indigenous households — economic disadvantage, extreme housing stress and overcrowding, excessive alcohol consumption, grief and trauma, health and mental health issues.
Several recent reports including Breaking the Silence: creating the future (NSW)9, Little Children are Sacred (NT)10 and the Children on APY Lands Commission of Inquiry (SA)11 have identified widespread incidence of sexual abuse of Indigenous children. One of the recurring themes of these reports is the culture of silence surrounding this issue, which results in major under-reporting and a consequent lack of action.
There is a clear need to address serious risk factors such as poverty and unemployment, intergenerational grief, trauma and family violence, low maternal age, poor school attendance, alcohol and substance abuse and poor social, community and health support infrastructure particularly in some remote communities. There is also a need to work with Indigenous communities to assist them to break through the sense of powerlessness and hopelessness in the face of widespread abuse. The complexity of many of these problems requires determined and innovative ways to tackle them.
The community sector has suggested that responses to Indigenous children vary markedly within and between jurisdictions. While circumstances will vary across families and communities, greater consistency in identifying and managing their needs is required. Stakeholders have suggested that it is important to develop innovative responses which recognise that there are currently limited placement options.
- AIHW Child protection Australia 2006-07, www.aihw.gov.au/publications/index.cfm/title/10566
- Scott, D, (2005) Child Protection: New Hope, Children, Youth and Women’s Health Oration
- The Allen Consulting Group, (2003) Protecting Children: The Child Protection Outcomes Project, Final Report for the Victorian Department of Human Services, www.allenconsult.com.au
- Keatsdale, (2003) Report into the cost of child abuse and neglect in Australia, Albion, Qld: Queensland Kids First Foundation
- Child and Family Welfare Association of Australia Inc, (2007) Call to Action for Australia’s Children
- McDowall, J, (2008) CREATE Report Card 2008: Transitioning from Care
- NSW Attorney General’s Department, (2006) Breaking the Silence: creating the future, www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au
- Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse, (2007) Little Children are Sacred, www.nt.gov.au
- Children on Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands Commission of Inquiry Report, (2008) www.service.sa.gov.au