Preliminary Community and Family Studies

Assessment Task 2

1. Give three different definitions of the term ‘family’. Explain why ‘family’ can be difficult to define. (2 marks)

● Australian Bureau of Statistics: “A family is defined as two or more persons, one of whom is at least 15 years of age, who are related by blood, marriage (registered or

defacto), adoption, step or fostering, and who are usually resident in the same household.”

● Cambridge Dictionary: “A group of people who are related to each other, such as a mother, a father and their children.”

● Oxford Dictionary: “A group consisting of two parents and their children living together as a unit.”

The definition of ‘family’ varies with tradition, culture, and how an individual perceives their own family. ‘Family’ can be difficult to define because of these factors. A certain individual may believe their family includes their blood-related members as well as some friends or neighbours. As each individual is brought up in different environments, making the way we perceive the world, different. For example, an individual may believe their family is only blood-related as that is what they have seen and been told by their family. If an individual, for example, was Indigenous Australian, they may believe their family includes their blood-related members as well as the members within their cultural group and extended family members. In the 21st century, ‘family’ is also difficult to define as society’s values and perceptions of others have changed compared to say 50 years ago. Our tolerance and understanding of others and their situations have changed, so de facto and same sex families now exist, without people judging them. Single parent families exist due to better resources available to them, such as financial support. People travel for work and education so they don’t necessarily live with family members all the time.

4. Define and provide examples of formal and informal types of support (3 marks)

Formal support is where the individual receives help and advice from a government or community agency. They can be ongoing or in intervals. Formal support includes those provided by government agencies or community organisations and usually assists specific

families with their needs. Formal support includes disability services, employment agencies and childcare facilities. Formal support may be a service provided in the case of an incident. For example, a government agency is centrelink, which is a payment program designed to help individuals and families who find it difficult for income. A community agency, for example, is the Salvation Army, which offers donated items at a low price range for individuals and families who can not afford basic necessities. Meals on Wheels provides a daily meal to those who are unable to prepare a meal for themselves.

Informal support is where advice and help is received from someone that the individual knows well. Informal support comes from people such as relatives, friends or neighbours who take care of you and assist you if needed. Relatives provide and receive support and assistance from family members who reside either within the same household or in another household. Friends and neighbours may also provide support and assistance. Generally no money exchanges hands, the help is provided as ‘goodwill’. For example, grandparents of an individual can babysit their child so the individual can return to work and not pay full time for child care. If an individual is feeling ill, a friend may drive them to the doctor’s office as they don’t feel well enough to drive, or friends making frozen meals for a family when the mother is in hospital for surgery.

8. Choose three types of family structure and analyse how they are different from each other. (6 marks)

Three different types of family structures include nuclear, single parent and childless families. These family structures all vary in different ways.

Nuclear family consists of two parents and their children. Nuclear families may have one or more children who are biological or adopted, but the main idea is that the parents are raising

their children together in the same family home. This is different to a single parent family structure as single parent families consist of just one parent with one or more children. In these cases, the parent either never married, widowed, or divorced. Single parent families have been on the rise since the 1960s when divorce rates started to increase. Single parent families consist of one adult and at least one child who is their own, through birth or adoption. Childless families are families with two parents who cannot have or don't want kids, or their children have grown up and moved away from the family home. Families without children at home have different interests, more free time and often greater financial resources than couples with children. -Childless couples don’t have to worry about the impact of divorce on their children, should they ever separate, however unlike the nuclear and single parent families, they don’t have children who may be able to look after them as they get older.-Childless couples will have more financial resources available to them to pay bills, have greater entertainment expenses and be able to afford (maybe) more luxurious holidays compared to nuclear and single parent family who may have less money to spend on themselves as their money is paying for household bills and the children’s expenses such as education and sporting commitments.-Single parent families only have one adult in the family so they are the sole decision maker, whereas nuclear and childless families have 2 adults to make the decision. 1 person making the decision can be easier as they don’t have to worry about other people’s opinions, however they may want another person’s input into the decision, which is not there eg when deciding on a loan, etc- A childless couple may want to live in a smaller house and may not need lots of bedrooms, so can afford to live in a unit or townhouse, compared to a nuclear family that may need more space if they have more than one child. A single parent family may also need more rooms, depending on the number of children.-A single parent family may need to share custody of the children, so the children may live one week with one parent (or alternate weekends) and then the next week with the other parent. This may cause disruption in the children’s lives as they need to be organised to take their clothes and possessions between the 2 parents homes. In contrast, children from a nuclear family will stay at the house throughout the growing up period and do not need to move between houses, giving them more stability.- Nuclear families have a busy life, especially when they have to take children to various activities in the one day, however with 2 parents available to do this, organisation is easier. In a single parent family, there may only be one adult who is able to do this, making it difficult to organisation transportation of the children and they may have to rely on other relatives or friends to transport the children to the activities.- Nuclear families who have both parents working may be able to have greater access to finances that allow them to access external resources such as childcare facilities, whereas a single parent family, with limited financial resources may have to rely on family or friends for child care and charity groups or government welfare to meet some of their basic needs for housing and food.- Childless couples don’t have to spend their time on weekends or after work driving children to activities - they can have their own interests and spend time on these.

11. Find an article about a family undergoing change. You must include a copy of the article and its source. Assess the impact this change (and potential future impacts) has had on the family. (8 marks)

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-09/families-with-severely-disabled-kids-giving-them-up-to-state/11092588, ABC News, ‘Absolutely horrendous': NDIS failures blamed as severely disabled kids put into state care, Published May 08 2019, Accessed June 18 2019.

Advocates blame NDIS failures as families give up severely disabled children to child protection

By Richard Willingham

Updated 9 May 2019, 8:16am

Children with high-needs disabilities are living in child protection because their parents can no longer look after them, with advocates blaming a lack of support from the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) for forcing parents to give up their children.

Government officials, advocates and care workers say it is "absolutely horrendous" that children with high-needs disabilities, who have been voluntarily relinquished by their parents, are living in the over-stretched residential care system, sometimes without NDIS support.

Before the scheme was introduced, Victoria provided some specialised care for those with a disability, including group accommodation — but now some go to child protection.

The advocates said had the NDIS provided specialised care, it would have prevented families from giving up their child to state care in the first place.

Rod and Martina McNeill were in the process of relinquishing their son Alex last year because they could no longer cope with his high needs.

Alex, 10, has a severe level of autism and other intellectual disabilities.

He requires 24-hour supervision to stop him self-harming and hurting others.

At his worst Alex smeared faeces in his home, he regularly ran away and often stood in the road oblivious to the dangers of cars.

"He self-harmed himself so bad by smashing his head in the floor, he was literally picking holes in his skin on his feet,'' Ms McNeill said.

"He was scratching his legs and his upper body, so there were just huge scratch marks that were bleeding all over him and we went 'what do we do?'"

Rod and Martina McNeill say Alex's behaviour improved with specialist care but he is not ready to return home. (ABC News: Kyle Harley)

Repeated, confronting incidents caused Ms McNeill, who has four other children, to have a breakdown.

Support from NDIS was limited, and every effort to increase support was a battle, the family said.

"They essentially said we have provided the needs for his disability, if you can't look after him as parents you need to relinquish him,'' Mr McNeill said.

The pair made the heartbreaking decision to relinquish their son into care.

But, Ms McNeill said, child protection had nowhere for him to go and eventually NDIS provided funding so Alex could attend a specialist care centre in Melbourne.

Irabina Autism Services has helped Alex improve his behaviour, but funding for that service has run out — and his parents say he is not ready to come home.

Children have a right to stay at home

As depressing as Alex's story is, it is not unique.

There are children and teens with high-needs disabilities living under the care of child protection across Australia.

In Victoria, there are 48 children who have been voluntarily relinquished living in residential state care; only half of them have some form of NDIS support within the system.

Prior to the NDIS, Victoria provided specialised out-of-home care for some disabled children.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison's pre-election budget revealed a $1.6-billion under-spend in the NDIS, which has infuriated advocates and users.

"To have children using a child protection system and to tell parents that is all that is on offer, when they actually probably know what their kids need, is just appalling,'' said Deb Tsorbaris, the chief executive of the Centre for Excellence in Child and Family Welfare.

Victoria's Commissioner for Children and Young People Liana Buchanan monitors child protection.

"We have children with disability who have additional needs because of those disabilities end up being removed from their families and put in out-of-home care, particularly our very stretched and frankly very flawed residential care system is absolutely horrendous,'' Ms Buchanan said.

The commissioner has raised concerns about the state of residential care.

Staff working in child protection and residential care are not trained to deal with higher-needs clients and service providers like Berry Street said it was having a negative impact.

Residential care units — known as 'resi care' — are already volatile places with at-risk children living there.

"It can cause conflict, it can cause some occupational violence and be a very difficult environment for those staff and the young people involved," said Michael Perusco, the chief executive of Berry Street.

A spokesperson for the National Disability Insurance Authority (NDIA) said the intention of the scheme was to support families to continue to care for their children and to keep families strong.

"The NDIA wants to reassure participants and their families that they are not required to relinquish their children in order to gain access to appropriate disability-related supports,'' she said.

The authority said at the end of March there were 34,000 people in Victoria under the age of 18 receiving support.

"The Victorian Government has legislation in place to support families in crisis and continues to be responsible for providing appropriate housing and supervision for children in both voluntary and involuntary out-of-home care,'' the spokesperson said.

Victoria's Minister for Child Protection, Luke Donnellan, said he and other state ministers had raised the issue with the Federal Government.

They also want help for those living in state care.

"The reason these children should be allowed into the system of the NDIS is because their issue is their disability," Mr Donnellan said.

The Labor minister pointed the finger at the Morrison Government for "depressing demand" for NDIS services.

A spokeswoman for the Federal Coalition said there had been no changes to the eligibility requirements for the NDIS since the scheme was first introduced by Labor in 2013.

It has promised to improve the scheme if re-elected.

"The Coalition are proud supporters of the NDIS — it is important to get it right,'' the spokesperson said.

Federal Labor's Linda Burney said the situation would be fixed, promising to work with states for "a person-first approach to the NDIS".

"This will mean that children in out-of-home-care and their families would get the services they need up front, and the state government and NDIS would work out who pays later on,'' she said.

Assess the impact this change (and potential future impacts) has had on the family

Rod and Martina McNeill have made the tough decision of relinquishing their severely disabled son, Alex McNeill, to a care centre. With Alex McNeill moving into care, the McNeill family are faced with a big change.

Alex McNeill living in a care centre is an Internal, Planned and Temporary change. With Alex McNeill receiving care and supervision from the care centre, this change can have a positive and negative impact on the family’s wellbeing. With the McNeill’s time now more free, the parents can socialise and spend more time with their other children and build a stronger relationship, affecting both parties social and emotional well-being. Emotionally, having Alex McNeill not at home can have an impact on the family. They may miss him a lot and feel annoyed that Alex McNeill can not live at home, with the family. The McNeill family’s physical well-being can be increased since their focus is deferred from Alex McNeill. They now have time to exercise and make healthy meals as well as enroll their kids in sports teams, be able to take them to training and games as well as watching them play. Economically, Alex McNeill requiring 24 hour care in a care centre with limited funding from NDIS (National Disability Insurance Scheme) can create a huge dent in the family’s income. Care for Alex McNeill is not cheap, meaning the majority of their income would be going towards the bill for the care centre. Alex McnNeill being in care has only slightly improved his behaviour, meaning he will have to stay in the care centre for quite some time. This means the McNeill’s have limited income to spend. They would only be able to purchase necessities as they need to save money for the future care bills from the care centre. Culturally, The McNeill’s now have time to visit festivals, try new foods, go on holidays and fulfill what they have always wanted to do. However, there economic status may limit this. Spiritual well-being has the potential to rise, with time to take care of themselves and reflect on their life. But, having Alex McNeill not at home can make the McNeill’s depressive and feel hopeless as they may believe they have failed their role of parenting. With Alex McNeill in care, the roles that the family has adopted may not change. While Alex McNeill was at home, the other children of Rod and Martina McNeill most likely would have taken on roles of household chores and errands. The children are likely to still take on these roles as The McNeill’s now may both work full-time jobs to pay for Alex McNeill’s care. If the older children are the appropriate age, they may also have to adopt a part-time or casual job to help with their income. The McNeill family have applied for NCIS, and have received funding from them. But, this funding is very limited. With technology, the McNeill family can receive immediate information about Alex McNeill and be informed if any emergency has taken place.

12. Design bumper stickers depicting 6 different family structures (3 marks)

1. Blended Family2. Childless Family

3. Extended Family

4. Nuclear Family

5. Same Sex couple

6. Sole Parent Family

13. Visit a community group. Create a presentation which demonstrates the way this group assists individuals overcome adversity. (8 marks)

-See powerpoint presentation