Parents first and foremost need support, encouragement, and advice in the challenging, sometimes difficult, but rewarding role of parenting.
Our research here at the Australian Institute of Family Studies consistently shows that the best way to protect children is to provide support and resources for parents.
This week, the Institute published a paper on “The role of supervisory neglect in childhood injury”. The purpose of the paper was to assist professionals working in the field to better understand the concept of ‘supervisory neglect’.
The paper notes some of the difficulties parents and carers face in providing supervision. This includes “impoverished families living in ‘poor’ neighbourhoods who may be unable to provide adequate nutrition, medical care or education for their children not because of a lack of recognition of the child’s needs or a want to do so, but because of a lack of access to resources.”
However, one media outlet has highlighted a single aspect of the paper – that child protection workers need to pay heed to the risks associated with children who present with multiple injuries.
As pointed out in the paper, professionals are already attuned to this issue and have many avenues open to them. For example, “parents and caregivers may simply need education about risk of injury and referral to resources for that education rather than intervention at the tertiary level.”
This early intervention strategy may then prevent some children from entering into the child protection system.
However, the Institute is not advocating a ‘bigger’ child protection system. Instead, we see it operating best when parents who are struggling are supported in the community by agencies and institutions like schools, maternal and child health services, playgroups, and networks of family and friends.
But when concerns are raised – for example by a referral from a hospital emergency department because of the injuries a child presents with – then child protection workers need to be attuned to the possibility that they may be seeing a case of ‘supervisory neglect’.
Of course, a lot more goes into an assessment of risk than merely looking at a child’s history of injuries. Child protection workers have sophisticated risk assessment tools and professional judgment to assist them in making decisions.
The most important message to understand is that supervisory neglect can be part of the picture of why children are at risk of harm.
We need to work together to ensure parents are supported in providing a secure and protective environment for children.
Dr Daryl Higgins
Deputy Director (Research)
Australian Institute of Family Studies
Dear Daryl
I agree wholeheartedly with you. I am currently conducting research on pre-school field officers in Victoria. I have discovered that there are very dedicated professionals out there who are working hard with vulnerable families. I have learnt that if these professionals can engage the families of a troubled child, they can ensure a much better outcome for the child, and prehaps prevent situations from getting out of hand. Being procative and working on prevention and early intervention seems so much more effective, on all levels, than the other alternatives.
Cheers
Erin
Comment by Dr Erin Pearson — September 21, 2012 @ 9:49 am
Dear Erin,
I think you’ve picked up on some really key issues that we were trying to convey with this paper. Its about being aware and alert to possibilities – knowing the risk that some different types of harm are often interrelated. Its important to not minimise risks–and how they accumulate–when considering appropriate responses. But of course, the most important first step is to look at the needs of any family, and consider what supports or new knowledge they may need to assist them in the task of parenting and creating safe/supportive environment to children.
I agree – being proactive and focusing on prevention is much better than waiting until damage has occurred and trying to fix things up then.
Cheers,
Daryl
Comment by Daryl Higgins — September 24, 2012 @ 12:38 pm
Dear Daryl,
An anecdote, brief. Carpooling to work with a friend recently. She had just taken a week off work to care for her ill 12 year old daughter. Phone call from daughter. She was choking. A quick u turn. A piece of meat on a bone lodged in throat. Ambulance. Emergency ward. Child okay. Mother not. Guilt… what if?
The present govt is introducing financial legislation to “encourage” single parents back to work by cutting parenting payments to parents when their child is 8 years of age. In Australia, we receive 4 weeks hols a year. A child receives 12 weeks. What is your opinion of children of 8 years being left alone at home for eight weeks
Of course in an ideal world there would be grandparents or neighbours who would care for them but this is not the 1950s. Holiday activities for 8 weeks a year? Great if one was on a high enough salary to afford them?
What is your opinion on the effect of young children left on their own?
Cheers,
Lisbeth
Comment by Lisbeth Eastoe — October 2, 2012 @ 12:36 pm
Dear Lisbeth,
You raise some really interesting moral dilemmas, and illustrate how sometimes the challenges of modern parenting, and the various policies affecting different parts of our lives can be incredibly complex. The research shows that parents often do ‘struggle’ to meet the competing demands of work and childcare. Our analyses of data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children show that often this occurs when there is no ‘stay-at-home parent’, without the use of formal childcare or grandparent care.
One of the purposes of our paper on supervisory neglect was to try and raise awareness of the complexity of defining what is appropriate care. Children being left on their own is one of the potential contributors to neglectful situations… though the research again suggests that children’s needs, developmental maturity, and past experiences all need to be taken into account.
Thanks for raising your concerns about factors that might contribute unwittingly to lack of appropriate supervision for school-aged children.
Cheers,
Daryl
Comment by Daryl Higgins — October 8, 2012 @ 10:13 am