I was recently challenged by a colleague to think about the sticky question of what social work, as a discipline, has achieved over the last 40–50 years. Being challenged about the efficacy of social work and the discipline's capacity for lasting impacts is hardly a new experience. Many social workers will have confronted the opinions of clients, managers, family members and the public about the contributions or otherwise that they perceive social workers to offer. I have had these experiences too, but there are particular times when such comments remain in one's memories. After the elapse of many years I do not claim to have total accuracy of recall, but perhaps the first time I was shaken by a challenge to my noble presumptions was when Dr John Paterson, Secretary of the Department of Health and Community Services, Victoria, spoke at a meeting of child protection workers around 1989–90. He declared that he thought a mature accountant could do as well in the role. As others have recalled, Dr Paterson ‘did not blush to ignore traditional codes on the role of public servants in the policy process and overtly sought to participate in normative statements about policy’ (Barraclough & Smith, 1994, p. 16). He was known for making offensive remarks. He described disability advocacy bodies as ‘piss and wind’ groups, denigrating them as people more interested in talk than getting their hands dirty delivering services (Milburn, 1993, p. 1). He precipitated great angst amongst public servants.

Family violence (also referred to as Domestic Violence and Intimate Partner Violence) describes violence that occurs within an intimate relationship, whether a current or former partner. Children can experience a range of abuses (emotional, physical, sexual and neglect) within the context of family violence, and harm is cumulative and may present as complex trauma. This paper is based on a practice presentation delivered at the International Childhood Trauma Conference in Melbourne (Australia) in June 2016. The purpose of this paper is to increase awareness of the impacts for children who have experienced family violence, to enhance understanding of the mechanisms that contribute to their trauma presentation, and to highlight the specific practice issues and considerations in providing therapeutic support to this client population, with the ultimate aim of improving diagnostic and treatment outcomes for children impacted by family violence. Sufficient safety and stability are required for children to experience therapeutic change, and if family violence is current, the initial response needs to be protective. Identification of family violence should prompt practitioners to use trauma-informed assessment and trauma-focused evidence-based treatments within a family therapy and systems framework. Family violence is complex and there are many barriers to treatment and practice considerations. Expansion of practitioner knowledge and skills in family violence trauma will enhance outcomes for children who have experienced family violence.

Service utilisation by refugee families may be affected by the mismatch between Western individualistic service delivery approaches and the target communities’ more collectivist cultural patterns and practices. In addition to access barriers, utilisation of early childhood services by refugees can also be impacted upon by distrust of services, health and settlement issues, stigma, unfamiliarity with early childhood programmes, and fear of child protection and other legal systems. This low service utilisation sits in conflict with the need for early interventions for very young children, who are in the peak period of brain development. This article explores the implementation of a model to address these issues in early childhood work with refugee families and communities, with the intent to increase service uptake. Some strategies to address potential barriers will be described in the context of a community engagement model that includes consultation, relationship building, collaborative flexible service design and delivery, partnerships in community capacity building and cross-referral. Flexible, culturally appropriate interventions can enhance strengths based, non-pathologising and development-focused approach. A community engagement approach will, nevertheless, present challenges for service providers who must be willing to adapt their practices. Services and funding bodies need to recognise that this process is lengthy and resource intensive, but will ultimately lead to better service delivery and uptake, potentially leading to improvements in health, development and relational outcomes, for children and families from refugee backgrounds.

The issue of what is ‘effective’ in therapeutic interventions with children and young people who have experienced maltreatment has attracted increasing professional interest since the 1980s. Currently, these interventions are subject to evaluative processes that privilege data collected from the adult experts, who design and deliver them. Measurements of effectiveness are predominantly based on a positivist paradigm, as indicated by the number of studies that use standardised measures to capture therapeutic success. An important concern is the neglect of children and young people's voices in the discussion of therapeutic efficacy.

This article presents the findings of a review of the literature, which revealed the continued privileging of adult ‘expert’ voices and the under-representation of the contributions from children and young people. However, when children and young people were engaged as active participants in evaluation processes, they were shown to demonstrate a depth of insight, which requires a reappraisal of adults as the only source of expertise in the effectiveness debate. The view that children and young people can be knowledge generators as well as active agents in their own healing is reflected by this article's proposals for future research partnerships with children and young people and changes to practice and policy development.

This research explored the experiences of care leavers, who lived in institutions (such as Children's Homes and orphanages) or other forms of out-of-home care between 1930 and 1989. Participants included representatives of three sub-cohorts: Forgotten Australians, members of the Stolen Generations and Child Migrants. Employing mixed methods, this research used three forms of data collection: surveys (n = 669), interviews (n = 92) and focus groups (n = 77). This research concentrated on participants’ experiences in care, leaving care, life outcomes after care (education, employment, health, wellbeing and relationships), coping strategies and resilience, current service needs and usage and participation in organisations as well as the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Most participants experienced extreme neglect and abuse while in care. Leaving care, often after years of institutionalisation, was generally a frightening and demoralising process. Despite these challenges, a number of participants demonstrated remarkable resilience. For many, however, these experiences had negative consequences in adulthood including serious physical and mental health problems. This often made adult learning, paid employment and positive relationships virtually impossible. Most survivors carry high levels of trauma and complex unmet needs. Implications for policy, practice and services are drawn from key findings.

This study examines the use of section 106A of the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 in the New South Wales in Children's Court. Section 106A was inserted into the Act by way of an amendment in November 2006. This amendment establishes that if a child has previously been removed from parental care and not restored to the parents, then that is prima facie evidence that any subsequent child born to these parents is in need of care and protection and can be subject to removal. The parents must then rebut this evidence if they are to recover or retain custody of the new born child. To date, no data exists about the use of this section of the Act, hence this study. The only significant finding was that if section 106A was cited in Court documents, then restoration of a child to family is less likely. The analysis did not show any significant relationship between Aboriginality and any of the other variables in the study.

Active youth participation models that tackle major social problems can promote positive youth development and wellbeing. Implementation and evaluation of youth participation models to curtail violence in families and other intimate relationships is limited. The present study reports on a process evaluation of a new youth participation model called R4Respect that features a peer-led approach to respectful relationships education, which is aimed at preventing domestic violence. The evaluation uses qualitative methods, based on interviews with youth participants and adult external stakeholders, drawing on the Tiffany–Eckenrode Program Participation Scale. The evaluation demonstrates that R4Respect is successfully engaging young people as decision-makers and peer-educators in strategies aimed at improving the understanding young people have of what constitutes respect in relationships. The R4Respect model shows that young people can fulfil an important role in the prevention of domestic violence.

In 2014, an article written by Dr Frank Ainsworth and Patricia Hansen was published in Children Australia entitled ‘Family foster care: Can it survive the evidence?’ The basic premise of the article was that evidence indicates family foster care either doesn't change the likelihood of positive outcomes for children, or makes it more difficult for positive outcomes to be achieved. Essentially, the view was that foster care is a risk to children in much the same way as there is a risk for children remaining at home with abusive or neglectful parents. As such, the authors stated that there should be a reduction in the use of family foster care, and increased efforts to keep children at home with supports. This article only came to our attention recently, and we had some issues with the conclusions that were drawn by the authors, particularly in terms of the evidence that is used to support their proposition. We were kindly offered an opportunity by the journal editors to submit this responding article.