Search

While there is much research on the topic of child maltreatment more broadly in Australia, a nuanced understanding of intergenerational child maltreatment is needed to improve our responses. Little work has considered all four intergenerational patterns of child maltreatment: cycle maintainers (maltreated parents with maltreated children), cycle breakers (maltreated parents with non‐maltreated children), cycle initiators (non‐maltreated parents with maltreated children) and a comparison group (non‐maltreated parents with non‐maltreated children). We use this terminology to maintain consistency with international literature, but acknowledge that these terms minimise the complexity inherent in contact with child protection systems. Research has mainly focused on maintainers, which hinders our ability to appropriately support all families and limits our understanding of individuals breaking the cycle. This paper outlines key knowledge gaps and identifies strategic areas of focus for researchers and policymakers. There is an urgent need for more emphasis on building resilience and strengths, the provision of more integrated and holistic support for families, and consideration of sex differences. We highlight the need for more research on this topic, particularly led by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and hope that the recommendations in this paper can be revisited and updated as this important research base grows. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quality early care and education (ECE) presents an unparalleled opportunity to avert disadvantage and promote children's development. Mealtimes are essential daily routines, yet are often overlooked in research on ECE quality. This paper crystallises a composite case study of ECE mealtimes in highly disadvantaged communities by combining Departing Radically in Academic Writing (DRAW) methodology with parent surveys, scorings of educator‐child interactions (inCLASS), and field notes. Poverty is perpetuated in these centres: children do not have enough food, and educator‐dictated feeding practices restrict children's opportunities to exercise their agency and learn. Systemic policy action is needed to address poverty in ECE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For more than three decades, official and independent enquiries have documented the poor outcomes experienced by many young people transitioning from out‐of‐home care (OOHC) in Australia, known as care leavers. Yet, until 2017, most of the state and territory governments cut off financial support to these vulnerable young people at no later than 18 years of age and failed to provide them with the ongoing material and relationship assistance into early adulthood guaranteed to most of their non‐care peers. Australia was regarded internationally as a leaving care laggard. This paper examines the remarkably effective advocacy strategies used by the Home Stretch campaign, formed in 2016, to persuade all Australian jurisdictions to extend OOHC until 21 years. By the end of 2022, every state and territory had agreed to introduce some form of extended care, and Australia was recognised as a global leader in leaving care policy and programmes provision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children with disabilities in out-of-home care (OOHC) are an overrepresented group in Australia, yet little is known about their circumstances, needs, and experiences within OOHC. Utilising a systematic scoping review methodology, we explored the state of knowledge about the experiences of children and young people with a disability in out-of-home care in Australia. Findings in this review speak to the unmet needs and challanges that children with disabilities face in child welfare systems and how systemic failures can lead to institutional pipelines of further maltreatment, adversity, and marginalisation. The review discusses the key themes in the literature, including (i) compounding trauma and placement failures, (ii) concerns of safety, stability, and neglect, (iii) limited control and choice, and (iv) disability and multisystem involvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: There is a growing recognition of the urgency to enhance health outcomes for children and young people residing in out-of-home care (OOHC). Research underscores the need to establish effective pathways to quality health care for children and young people who have been exposed to trauma. Child protection (CP) practitioners should play a vital role in proactively improving health outcomes and navigating the intricacies of healthcare systems. Their involvement in initiating and collaborating on healthcare interventions is pivotal for the well-being of these vulnerable children and young people. However, challenges associated with poor health literacy and the complexities of healthcare systems hinder collaborative service delivery in the Australian context. This review explores how CP practitioners support the health care of children and young people in their care. Design/methodology/approach: A scoping review followed Arksey and O'Malley's framework, employing a narrative synthesis to assess the selected studies. Findings: Health outcomes for children and young people in OOHC remain under-researched and potentially under-resourced within the realm of CP practice. There is room for enhanced practices and system integration in CP service delivery to better address health needs and prevent further health and well-being disparities. Originality/value: Through this scoping review and involving industry experts in the discussion of findings, this study contributes valuable insights to the existing knowledge base regarding the active participation of CP practitioners in addressing the healthcare needs of vulnerable children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Mentoring literature contains diverse, but as yet unclassified, mentoring relationship types. • Mentoring for young people young people transitioning out of care must address specific contextual needs and barriers. • More attention is needed in mentoring literature on the policy context and the nature of the gender and power in mentoring relationships. In Australia, out-of-home care (OoHC) is provided to safeguard children and young people unable to live with their families. Typically, this care stops at 18 years of age, leaving many young people without the relational support to find employment and stable accommodation. Mentoring is increasingly proposed as a way to support young people exiting care, though the types of mentoring and contextual factors vary considerably. This rapid review aims to identify key features of mentoring programs that support young people in OoHC. This paper utilised a rapid review methodology to survey the academic literature on mentoring programs with young people in OoHC. The authors conducted literature searches in October 2022 using a search string designed to provide targeted exposure to the literature. Articles were limited by year and location, with the specific search string and limitations applied to the Scopus database, and Proquest and Informit platforms. Utilising literature, we identified five overlapping models for mentor–mentee relationships into a provisional typology of five categories based on varying levels of formality and familiarity in the relationships: 'formal', 'natural', 'near-age', 'peer', and 'therapeutic'. In doing so, we identified seven important features of mentor–mentee relationships: shared experiences, relationship duration, boundaries and other relationships, identity and self-worth, educational contexts, power and participation, and role modelling. We identified four issues relating to mentoring in OoHC that are informed by the needs and barriers experienced by young people: training and support for mentors, unique challenges faced by young people in OoHC, transition out of care, and the matching process. Lastly, we established what might impact mentoring programs buy critically reflecting on the policy context and notions of empowerment. This rapid review of mentoring programs for care-experienced young people seeking employment offers valuable insights to inform future programs. The findings highlight diverse and unclassified mentoring relationship types, the absence of anticipated gender-specific findings, a lack of examination of the policy context, and a need for more robust conceptualisations of empowerment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]