This document only includes the executive summary. Please email FIN WA Inc. should you like to have the full report emailed to you.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Family Inclusion Network of Western Australia (FIN WA Inc.) was established in Perth on the 22 July 2004 and formally incorporated as an association in the State of Western Australia on 6 October 2006. The purpose of FIN WA Inc. is to provide a range of necessary services to natural parents who are in crisis following the removal of their children by the State. Services include case management, information and support. A support group for parents is run once a month in a neighbourhood centre in Girrawheen. Services are also made available to parents who are at risk of losing their children and to grandparents of children in state care and other relatives. All services are presently delivered by volunteers. Services are not provided to children.

Sponsorship of FIN WA Inc. is provided by people and organisations committed to the purpose of FIN WA Inc. AnglicareWA, UWA and Mercy Care are the three main entities which provide staff time and resources each week to ensure the objectives of FIN WA Inc. are met. This is an ‘in-kind’ contribution. Other FIN WA Inc. individual members also donate their time on a regular basis. Members include academics, counsellors, business consultants, communication specialists, social workers, nurses and support workers.

Past Research and Practice

Typically in Australia, departments responsible for child protection provide a range of services to both children and families. These extend from referral, through a variety of family support interventions, to therapeutic services and out of home placements. Many of these services are provided by non-government agencies, funded either by the state child protection departments or from other sources. Currently there are services for foster parents, children in care and young adults who are leaving care; however, there are no dedicated services designed to support parents and family members through the child protection process in Australia (Thompson & Thorpe, 2003).

The research evidence is that children and families who come into contact with child protection departments commonly share an experience of extreme disadvantage indicated by low income, often from pensions or benefits, single parent families, housing problems including homelessness, mental illness, substance misuse and domestic violence (SCRGSP (Steering Committee for the Review of Government Services Provision, 2008). Indigenous families are over-represented amongst the disadvantaged in Australia, and Indigenous children have incidents of abuse substantiated at rates well above those of the mainstream, and represent about 30% of children in care.

Since 2001/02 Australian child abuse notifications have nearly doubled. The reasons for this are numerous and include raised public awareness of child protection matters, extended mandatory reporting systems, and other changes in legislation, policy and practice. Substantiations in many jurisdictions have also increased, albeit not at the same rate as the increase in notifications (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) 2007:1-15).

In Western Australia, in 2005/06, there were 3,231 reported allegations/concerns of child abuse to what is now the Department for Child Protection. This figure represents a mix of reports under the Child Welfare Act 1947 and the Child and Community Services Act 2004 that became the principal child protection Act in WA from March 1, 2006. Of the 3009 children reported (from 3231 notifications), 354 were placed on protection orders, a number and percentile that has grown since 2002 (Department for Community Development 2006: 48-67).

Purpose of this Research

The purpose of this research is to measure the opinions and beliefs held by referring professionals in reference to what types of services they believe should be made available to parents with children in care. A research study measuring parents’ opinions is being undertaken by UWA and is due to be completed before July 2008.

Research Benefits

The principal benefit of this study was to measure whether there was a need to fund a service specifically designed to meet the current and future needs of parents with children in care and others at risk of losing their children.

Sample

The sample size for this study was 106 (n = 106) helping professionals. Respondents included social workers, support workers, advocates, psychologists, nurses and counsellors. The research instrument used for this study was a survey. The survey was written and revised by the FIN WA Inc. management committee. Once it was completed and uploaded to the FIN WA inc. website, ten helping professionals were asked to test the survey and to report problems such as poorly phrased sentences. It was critical that each question be understood by respondents in a similar manner. The internet layout of the survey was designed to ensure it was easy for participants to complete and complied with SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) coding requirements. The final online survey included 23 items (questions) of which 21 were fixed-answer and two were open-ended (qualitative responses). Of the 23 items, 10 were in the demographics section. Fixed-answer interval questions adhered to Likert scale unless the required responses were of a nominal (e.g., gender) or ordinal (e.g. employment length) nature. The internet survey was finalised by mid February 2008 and distributed to networks of helping professionals via email the Western Australian Council of Social Services’ e-news bulletin. Both government and non-government helping professionals were asked to complete the online survey. Participation was not compulsory and only extended to professionals who work with parents.

Data Collection and Processing

The data collection period for the survey was four weeks, commencing on the night of 19 February 2008 and finishing in the morning of 12 March 2008. On 15 March the researcher compiled all the questionnaires and commenced entering data into SPSS, a statistical package.

Population Demographics

The demographics describing the sampled population are listed below:

 The majority of respondents (27 per cent) said they would see, on average, between ten and 20 clients per month. 16 per cent would see between 21 and 30 clients per month and 15 per cent said they would see between 31 and 40 clients per month. The number of people who said they saw between 41 and 50 clients per month dropped to 9.5 per cent before increasing to 11.5 per cent for those who said they saw between 51 and 60 clients per month. Of interest, 11.5 per cent of respondents said they saw more than 71 clients per month.

 The professional title appointed to the highest number of respondents was social worker (35 per cent) followed by support workers (19 per cent). Advocates accounted for just over 8.5 per cent as did counsellors (also 8.5 per cent). A number of nurses (7.5 per cent) also completed the survey. Psychologists accounted for just over 4.5 per cent which was expected in this area of work.

 The findings show that 21 per cent of respondents work for a government department; 63 per cent work in a not-for-profit organisation; 9.5 per cent work in a medical or health centre and just under seven per cent work in another capacity.

 Close to 88 per cent of respondents were female. This finding was expected considering the nature of people attracted to work in social service settings.

 A high number of respondents (50 per cent) have worked in the helping services’ industry for less than ten years. Furthermore, 17 per cent of people have worked in the industry for between 11 and 15 years; and 15 per cent for between 16 and 20 years.

 Just over 80 per cent of respondents had completed a university degree or higher.

 The majority of respondents (n = 90) were from WA.

 The majority of helping professionals (59 per cent) said they provided services to people in the metropolitan area. A further 19 per cent said they worked in regional locations; 10.5 per cent delivered services in both regional and metropolitan areas; and 11.5 per cent of respondents said they provided support to people throughout the state.

Research Objectives

The management committee of FIN WA Inc. wanted to know the answers to a number of questions frequently asked by members and government department representatives. These questions were re-worded into research objectives. These objectives are listed below with the findings denoted beneath. Another question posited by the FIN WA Inc. management committee was whether differences would emerge between government and non-government helping professionals.

ONE: To measure helping professionals’ perceived levels of confidence when working with parents who have children in care.

Respondents were asked to rate their level of confidence when working with parents who have children in care. The response scale was a five-point Likert scale from ‘not at all confident’ to ‘very confident’. The mean response was 2.75 with a standard deviation of 1.11. This result shows implies that helping professionals believe they are somewhat confident when required to provide support to parents; however would benefit from receiving training in this specialist area. No differences emerged between government and non-government helping professional responses.

TWO: To find out from helping professionals the number of parents they would see who have had their children removed from them or who are at risk of losing their children.

65 per cent of helping professionals said they would see less than five parents in an average month at risk of losing their children. A further 21 per cent said they would see between five and ten parents in an average month who were at risk of losing their children. These statistics were fairly similar to the numbers of parents helping professionals said they would see in an average month who had already had their children removed: 65 per cent saw less than five parents in an average month and 12.5 per cent said they saw between five and ten parents in an average month.

THREE: To establish if helping professionals provide support services to parents with children in care despite it is not being part of their normal duties.

79 per cent of respondents said they provided support services and information to parents with children in care, although it was not part of their normal work responsibilities. No significant differences emerged between government (77 per cent said yes) and non-government (79 per cent said yes) helping professionals.

FOUR: To determine whether helping professionals believe there are adequate services in Australia to help parents with children in care.

In response to the question ‘do you believe there are adequate ‘parent-focused’ services in Australia to help parents with children in care’ 82 per cent of 105 respondents answered ‘no’. This means the majority of people completing the survey believe there are not adequate services in Australia for parents with children in care. No significant differences emerged between government (77 per cent said no) and non-government (83 per cent said no) helping professional responses.

FIVE: To find out if helping professionals believe preventive services will reduce the number of children being taken into care.

85 per cent of respondents said they had been in contact with parents who, they believe, could have prevented the removal of their children had more family support services been available to them. This is a significant finding which confirms a need for a dedicated and funded family support service to be made available to parents at risk of losing their children. Both government (86.5 per cent) and non-government (84 per cent) helping professionals agreed that dedicated support services could prevent the removal of children from parents. Therefore, no differences emerged between the government and non-government sector.

SIX: To elicit from helping professionals what services are required to help parents with children in care more effectively work with people in government departments.

Prior to the constructing the survey social workers and service specialists were asked what services they believed should be included in the study. The areas they mentioned as ‘essential’ were case management, information, support, advocacy, counselling and access to legal advice. FIN WA Inc. does not presently provide all these services, but can refer clients in need.

At least 89 per cent of respondents agreed that advocacy, case management, counselling, information, access to legal advice and support groups should be made available to parents with children in care. The findings were:

 More than 90 per cent of respondents said they believed parents who had access to advocacy services would be able to more effectively work with people in government departments. Of interest, a test was run to determine if any differences would emerge between government and non-government helping professionals. An independent t-test returned a significant difference (sig = 0.031) where government workers were less likely to say parents needed advocacy (µ = 2.60; s = 0.74) compared to non-government workers (µ = 2.90; s = 0.37).

 89 per cent of respondents said they believed parents who had access to case management would be able to more effectively work with people in government departments. No differences emerged when a test was run on government and non-government helping professionals’ responses.

 More than 97 per cent of respondents said they believed parents who had access to counselling would be able to more effectively work with people in government departments. No significant differences emerged between government and non-government helping professionals.

 98 per cent of respondents said they believed parents who had access to information would be able to more effectively work with people in government departments. No differences emerged between government and non-government helping professionals.

 92 per cent of respondents said they believed parents who had access to legal advice would be able to more effectively work with people in government departments. No differences emerged between government and non-government helping professionals.

 91 per cent of respondents said they believed parents who had access to support groups would be able to more effectively work with people in government departments. No significant differences emerged between government and non-government helping professionals.

A Bivariate correlations test found correlations between providing advocacy services and legal advice and also between counselling and provision of information and counselling and provision of legal advice.

Conclusions

This research report supports the notion that a dedicated family support service is needed for parents who have children in care. This service, according to helping professionals, should provide parents with access to case management, information and support groups. Other essential services included access to advocacy, legal advice and counselling.

Other recommendation made to FIN WA Inc.’s management committee include:

 persevere with securing funding for this necessary service;

 ensure the service provides a comprehensive case management service for parents in crisis following the removal of their children;

 provide preventive services that assist parents to effectively work through the issues that are placing them at risk of losing their children;

 create and distribute information and tip sheets to helping and referring professionals explaining what to do when they meet parents at risk of losing their children and others who already have children in care;

 devise and offer specialist training programs to helping professionals who work in government and non-government settings;

 continue to build networks and relations with helping professionals who are approached by natural parents, and this also includes the critical role played by anti-natal nurses, teachers and doctors; and

 become familiar with models of practice utilised in Victoria and overseas, such as in England.