Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T22:27:50.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social injustice for ‘at risk’ adolescents and their families

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2016

Frank Ainsworth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

For the last twenty-five years, in Australia and in most western type countries, the planning of services for children and families has been strongly influenced by a series of ideological concepts. These concepts are: deinstitutionalization, normalization, least restrictive environment, mainstreaming, minimal intervention, and diversion. Together they are the central tenets of a paradigm (CTP) currently used by policy makers and human service planners. This paper argues that the use of the CTP has had an unintended negative impact. It has lead to the neglect of the most difficult ‘at risk’ adolescents and their families. What we have is a situation where services of sufficient power, intensity and duration (PID) needed by this group are not favoured since they do not conform to the CTP. For ‘at risk’ adolescents and their families this is socially unjust.

Type
Research Article
Information
Children Australia , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , 1999 , pp. 14 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ainsworth, F. (1997). Family centered group care: Model building, Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Ainsworth, F., Maluccio, A. N. & Small, R. W. (1996) ‘A framework for family centered group care practice: Guiding principles and practice implications’, in Family focused practice in out of home care. A handbook and resource directory, ed Braziel, D. J., Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America Press.Google Scholar
Bates, B. C., English, D. J. & Kouidou-Giles, S. (1997) ‘Residential treatment and its alternatives’, Child and Youth Care Forum, 26, 1, 7–51.Google Scholar
Bath, H. (1997), ‘Recent trends in the out-of-home care of children in Australia’, Children Australia, 22, 2, 4–8.Google Scholar
Beker, J. & Magnuson, D. (eds) (1996), Residential education as an option for at-risk youth, New York: Haworth Press.Google Scholar
Brindle, D. (1998, Oct 23), ‘Children’s home staff will have be trained’, The Guardian, p. 4.Google Scholar
Burchard, J. D. & Clarke, R. T. (1989), ‘Individualised approaches to treatment: Project Wraparound’, in Second Annual Conference Proceeding from the Children’s Mental Health and Policy Conference: Building a Research Base. Research and Training, eds Agarin, A., Frieldman, R. Duchnowski, A. Kutask, K. Silver, S. & Johnson, M., Center for Children’s Mental Health, Florida Mental Health Institute. University of Southern Florida, Tampa; Florida, pp 51–37.Google Scholar
Curtis, P. A., Papa-Lentini, C., Alexander, G. & Brockman, C. (1998), The Odyssey project: A descriptive and prospective study of residential group care, group homes and therapeutic foster care. Report no. 1. An update on baseline statistics, Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America.Google Scholar
Denholm, C., Ferguson, R. & Pence, A. (eds). (1987), Professional child and youth care. The Canadian perspective, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Department of Health (1998), Children living away from home. Messages from the research, London: Author.Google Scholar
Farmer, E. & Pollock, C. (1998), Caring for sexually abused and abusing children away from home, Chicester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Gibbs, J., Potter, G. B. & Goldstein, A. P. (1995), Teaching youth to think and act responsibly through a peer helping approach, Champaign, IL: Research Press.Google Scholar
Grissom, G. R. & Dubnov, W. L. (1989), Without locks and bars, New York: Praeger Google Scholar
Hills, D. & Child, C. (1998), Evaluating residential child care training, Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Inter-Ministerial Committee on Young People at Risk (1996), Interim policy recommendations, Pretoria.Google Scholar
Inter-Ministerial Committee on Young People at Risk (1998), Report of the pilot projects, Pretoria.Google Scholar
Kahan, B. (1994), Growing up in groups, London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Kent, R. (1997), Children’s Safeguards Review, Edinburgh: The Scottish Office.Google Scholar
Levy, A. & Kahan, B. (1991), The pindown experience and the protection of children, Stafford: Staffordshire County Council.Google Scholar
Levy, Z. (1996), ‘Conceptual foundation for developmentally oriented residential education: A holistic framework for group care that works’, in Residential education as an option for at-risk youth, eds Beker, J. and Magnuson, D., New York: Haworth Press.Google Scholar
Rapp, C.A. (1998), Strength model: a case management approach to persistent and severe mental illness, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Saleebey, D. (ed) (1997), The strengths perspective in social work practice (2 nd. Edn.), New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Schuh, A. & Caneda, C. (1997), ‘A case for residential schools for economically disadvantaged schools’, Residential Treatment for Children and Youth, 14, 4, 1–14.Google Scholar
Sinclair, I. & Gibbs, I. (1998), Children’s homes. A study in diversity, Chicester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Small, R. (1999), Chief Executive Officer of the Walker School and Home, personal communication with the author.Google Scholar
Staller, K. M. & Kirk, S. A. (1997), ‘Unjust freedom: The ethics of client self determination in runaway youth shelters’, Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 14, 3, 223–242.Google Scholar
Utting, W. (1997), People like us. The report of the review of the safeguards for children living at home, London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.Google Scholar
van Schalkwyk, M. & de Jonge, H. (1998), ‘A four year degree in child and youth development’, Child and Youth Care, 16, 8, 8–10.Google Scholar
Vorrath, H. H. & Brendtro, L. (1985), Positive peer culture (2 ndEdn.), New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Wagner, G. (1988), Residential care: A positive choice, London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Welfare Update (1998), Newsletter of the Department of Welfare on the Restructuring of Social Welfare in South Africa, Vol. 4, No. 2. Author.Google Scholar
Whitaker, D., Archer, L. & Hicks, L. (1998), Working in children’s homes: Challenges and complexities. Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar