Social Policy of the Integration of Family and Children Support - Literature review Example

SOCIAL POLICY AND SOCIAL WORK: By (Insert both names) (Name of class) (Professor’s name) (Institution) (City, State) (Date) Background information The Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care (SNAICC) is a state organ in Australia which represents the issues of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families and children. The organization was officially established as a non-profit in 1981. Its initial national executive election was held in 1982. SNAICC was formally formed as a national representative organ to be financed by the state according to Lavalette, Michael & Pratt, Alan (2001). It has since grown to incorporate within its membership portfolio foster care programs, family and link reunion services, services for the vulnerable young persons, family homes, playgrounds, children day care services, voluntary associations, educations services on early childhood, community groups and Multi-functional Aboriginal Children’s services (MACS). The organization also has a subscriber and network links of about 1500 groups of communities, most of them being the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups. The organization is managed by group’s national executive members and is funded by the department of Housing, families, community services, and the department of education, workplace relations and employment. Besides its secretariat function, the organization’s resource services endeavors to bridge the resource gaps highlighted across the children and families of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander service sector and to offer a central resource sharing point. They encourage partnership establishment in all their services. All their resource services are evaluated externally. Substantive Issues: SNAICC provides recommendations and comments to the below components of Human Rights Action Plan: SNAICC has the concern that, in the non existence of a national Human Rights Act, The Australia’s institutional and legal human rights protection in insufficient, especially for communities and individuals who are disadvantaged or marginalized. Australia is yet to integrate its obligations to human rights comprehensively within domestic practice and laws. With the governments’ political outfit, this leaves an inconsistent and fragmented approach and non enforceable solutions for violations. Australia is not a member of the vital global instruments for the protection of human rights of the Aboriginal and Torres Islander persons and for the effective provision of solutions. SNAICC holds the recommendations to develop human rights procedures and instruments as suggested by the Human Rights Law Resource Centre in realizing the rights. The ideologies that underpins the SNAICC activities: According to Lavalette, Michael & Pratt, Alan (2001) the children placement in Out of Home Care is broadly acknowledge being the cruelest form of the intervention of the welfare of the children. As at June 30, 2010, 10,512 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young children with the Out of Home Care, a figure indicating 9 times the pace of the children who are non-indigenous. SNAICC in 2011 undertook resource and research development functions to offer support the improved abidance with the Aboriginal and Torres Islander Child Placement Principle (ATSICPP). The ATSICPP upholds the significance of Aboriginal and Torres Islander Children within the out of home welfare to stay while connected to their culture and family. SNAICC also acknowledges of the destructive effects of the traditional policies of forced and assimilation and unjustified children removal on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. In every jurisdiction, the NCAIC is a stakeholder of child welfare legislation and needs a similar downward order of children placement who would want to be out of the home care. The initial preference within the policy if to place the children with their kingship groupings or extended families, the following preference is to place the children within their local communities and the third option is to place them with another Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person within that locality. In the event that all these options have been completely exploited, the fourth option is to be the non-Aboriginal and non-family or placement with the Torres Islander as Lavalette, Michael & Pratt, Alan (2001) found out. The actualization of the principle calls for consultation with the appropriate Torres Strait Islander or Aboriginal concerning the placement of children and that they are supported to maintain contact with their culture, language and family. According to SNAICC, the Aboriginal and Torres Islander Children have equal rights just like other Australian Children, comprising the right for education, the right for safety, health care right and so forth. As indigenous populace of Australian land, they should have special rights. The bequest that all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children have the privilege to take over is a special spiritual and cultural heritage that extends to 400 decades ago (Mendes 2008). SNAICC has assumed the duty as ISG (Indigenous Sub-Group Convener) as a robust opportunity to improve international conscious and spotlight the success narrations and the challenges confronting our families and children. Who is the ISG? – They are composed of the Indigenous Non Governmental Organizations across the globe. They are basically a resource networking and sharing avenue, as opposed to being a representative organ. ISG promoted the drafting and the consultation of the purposeful recommendations regarding the Indigenous Children and their provisional rights within the Convention. The current strategies of the ISG comprise: Promoting General Comment awareness (for instance, through development of templates of posters, publications among others for the Indigenous factions to use and adapt); Operate on assessing the consciousness and orientation to the General Comment by the states in their recommendations. Increasing supporters and membership. NSAICC human rights obligations If a state organ (Government) appreciates that its populace have specific rights by way of signing by way of establishing an instrument of human rights, it therefore holds the responsibility within the international law to protect, respect and fulfill such rights. Respect: the duty to respect the rights calls for the state organ not to partake any practice or action that deemed to interfere with their enjoyment of the people’s rights. For instance, the government should not hinder people from carrying on with their own spiritual practice as stated by Lavalette, Michael & Pratt, Alan (2001). Protect: the duty to protect calls for the state organs to avert human rights violations of an individual by another party or an organization. For instance, the state organs protect the rights of children to be freed from violence by way of laws which deters and criminalizes abuse of children. Fulfill: the duty to fulfill calls for the government organs to undertake appropriate actions to promote, facilitate and provide so as the actualize human rights. For economic and social rights, just like, rights to education, food, and health, this strives that the state organs should undertake the necessary measures with its resources to ensure that these rights are realized. This appreciates that certain nations may not have enough finances to actualize these rights instantly (Mendes 2008). The funding of the Aboriginal communities: The ministry for Indigenous Affairs has recently through the media release has announced major financial support for channeled to the Aboriginal societies within the Northern Territory being a commitment of the Government of Australia greater future programs in the Northern Territory initiative. This funding is meant to boost remote policing, basic health care, education and the well being and safety of the youth, Aboriginal children and families within the communities of the Aboriginal groups, and also to enhance municipal services in outstations and homelands. In the next ten years the Government of Australia shall invest: Over the next decade the Australian Government will invest: $583 million “so as to make sure that all children acquire decent schooling and attend classes each day”. This funding will ensure that 200 teachers are retained in the NT remote schools and to enable remote teachers, comprising indigenous Aboriginal teachers, acquire the necessary skills to deliver specialist learning process in intensive literacy and numeracy for second language learners. $719 million has being set aside to promote the wellbeing and health of 65,000 Aboriginal persons with the NT, comprising new drug and alcohol treatment programs. The government of Australia shall continue funding the Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organizations and the NT Government to provide basic healthcare provisions. $619 million will be directed to improve remote policing, legal assistance and community night surveillance. The finances will enable the continued staffing of 60 permanent NT law enforcement officers within 18 remote locations and establish four extra permanent remote locations polices units within the communities. This finances also aid in the support of progressive functions of the Substance Abuse Intelligence Desk (SAID) and Dog operations Unit to curb substance abuse within the remote societies. Key strategies The SNAICC did petition a parliamentary service committee looking for strategic Future laws for the NT Aboriginal communities to decline the bills package, stating that it needs to be redesigned in compliance with the international laws of human rights of which Australia is signatory. In their application to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, the organizations claims that the bills proposed do not offer a well structured response to the elements which were highlighted as the underlying principle for the 2007 NTER (The Northern Territory Emergency Response): complex and serious concerns around the protection of the children, the fundamental predicaments of violence, alcoholism, generational trauma and poverty according to (Fawcett et al. 2010). Regarding the formal and amended rejoinder of the NTER, the projected package of Stronger Futures is way out of the integrated, holistic measures which were proposed in 2007 “Children are Sacred Report” which prompted the intervention of the Australian Government. In as much as SNAICC thinks that the government has made great attempts to respond to a couple of major issues with the NTER, the critical flaws stay hugely unchanged in the legislation proposed. The SNAICC remains resolute that the imposed solutions on the community which maintain undermining their strength and autonomy, are contravening their principal human rights, and will have no success. According to the organization, these are very critical concerns; “the Aboriginal children wellbeing and the thriving communities are issues of fundamental concern to each one of us”, SNAICC put in writing in its application. SNAICC robustly suggests that the laws redressing endemic concerns of less fortunate in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander society have to in conformity with the fundamental human rights described in the Declaration of the United Nations 2007 on principal rights of the Indigenous Communities, which the government of Australia endorsed in 2009 as indicated by (Fawcett et al. 2010). The organization states that this not just a requirement to abide by the international legislative obligations, but prompts that the response proposed put right the causes of principal child protection issues, as oppose to the symptoms and provide support to the empowering programs that focus on the strengths of the community. Some of the principal human rights fundamentals which SNAICC views as to have not been entirely reflected in the package of Stronger Futures include; The self determination rights- in brief, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community rights to be in charge of their future and lives comprising social, economic and cultural growth and development. The community’s right to engage in the decisions of the government which affect them, and to provide their prior, free and informed approval to the decisions that can have impact of them. The right that they are not discriminated against indirectly or directly. The right maintain and develop cultural norms, institutions and practices And finally the right to basic education. Conclusion: SNAICC advocates that the governmental committees petition the Government to implement strength-based, long term approach to tackle concerns for the well being and development of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families and children in Northern Territory communities and beyond, which upholds the fabric connection of equity and trust with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander persons. In view of Neoliberalism and social policy which sees paucity as “a destiny brought upon oneself”, basically it is a fair reprisal for not wanting to work and sell yourself in a free market. As a result the government and enterprises are waived of the obligation for realizing social and ethical ideologies as this is exclusively the duty of the individual (Fawcett et al. 2010). The approach proposed has imposed obligation without making sure the existence of vital enabling elements, for instance the integration of family and children support provisions or sufficient and necessary infrastructure and housing, without which the issues of constructive brining up of child, health and education could not be addressed. These provisions have to deliver the basis of efforts to restructure the community fabric that are traumatized and impoverished. The organization is calling for a partnership that has a credible approach and the establishment of the Aboriginal Community-based models for the intervention and prevention of child neglect and abuse. Such systems have proven to be successful in other countries, for example the United States, Canada and New Zealand, in offering the most effective and sustainable outcomes. SNAICC has endeavors to work with the Government of Australia and like minded NGOs to develop sustainable long term solutions to the recurrent concerns within the Northern Territory. References: Mendes, Philip (2006) Inside the Welfare Lobby: A history of Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS). Sussex Academic Press Mendes, Philip (2008) Australia's Welfare Wars Revisited UNSW Press, Sydney. Fawcett, Barbara et al (2010) Social Policy and Social Change. Palgrave Macmillan. Melbourne. Lavalette, Michael & Pratt, Alan (2001) Social Policy. Sage Publications. London Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care Response to The National Standards for Out of Home Care Consultation Paper 1 April 2010.   Read More

Australia is not a member of the vital global instruments for the protection of human rights of the Aboriginal and Torres Islander persons and for the effective provision of solutions. SNAICC holds the recommendations to develop human rights procedures and instruments as suggested by the Human Rights Law Resource Centre in realizing the rights. The ideologies that underpins the SNAICC activities: According to Lavalette, Michael & Pratt, Alan (2001) the children placement in Out of Home Care is broadly acknowledge being the cruelest form of the intervention of the welfare of the children.

As at June 30, 2010, 10,512 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young children with the Out of Home Care, a figure indicating 9 times the pace of the children who are non-indigenous. SNAICC in 2011 undertook resource and research development functions to offer support the improved abidance with the Aboriginal and Torres Islander Child Placement Principle (ATSICPP). The ATSICPP upholds the significance of Aboriginal and Torres Islander Children within the out of home welfare to stay while connected to their culture and family.

SNAICC also acknowledges of the destructive effects of the traditional policies of forced and assimilation and unjustified children removal on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. In every jurisdiction, the NCAIC is a stakeholder of child welfare legislation and needs a similar downward order of children placement who would want to be out of the home care. The initial preference within the policy if to place the children with their kingship groupings or extended families, the following preference is to place the children within their local communities and the third option is to place them with another Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person within that locality.

In the event that all these options have been completely exploited, the fourth option is to be the non-Aboriginal and non-family or placement with the Torres Islander as Lavalette, Michael & Pratt, Alan (2001) found out. The actualization of the principle calls for consultation with the appropriate Torres Strait Islander or Aboriginal concerning the placement of children and that they are supported to maintain contact with their culture, language and family. According to SNAICC, the Aboriginal and Torres Islander Children have equal rights just like other Australian Children, comprising the right for education, the right for safety, health care right and so forth.

As indigenous populace of Australian land, they should have special rights. The bequest that all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children have the privilege to take over is a special spiritual and cultural heritage that extends to 400 decades ago (Mendes 2008). SNAICC has assumed the duty as ISG (Indigenous Sub-Group Convener) as a robust opportunity to improve international conscious and spotlight the success narrations and the challenges confronting our families and children. Who is the ISG?

– They are composed of the Indigenous Non Governmental Organizations across the globe. They are basically a resource networking and sharing avenue, as opposed to being a representative organ. ISG promoted the drafting and the consultation of the purposeful recommendations regarding the Indigenous Children and their provisional rights within the Convention. The current strategies of the ISG comprise: Promoting General Comment awareness (for instance, through development of templates of posters, publications among others for the Indigenous factions to use and adapt); Operate on assessing the consciousness and orientation to the General Comment by the states in their recommendations.

Increasing supporters and membership. NSAICC human rights obligations If a state organ (Government) appreciates that its populace have specific rights by way of signing by way of establishing an instrument of human rights, it therefore holds the responsibility within the international law to protect, respect and fulfill such rights.

Read More