Most of the pioneering work in relation to permanency planning has been carried out in Oregon by the Regional Research Institute for Human Services and the State Children's Services Department. As the Oregon project has been documented in great detail in five excellent volumes:

1. 1. Barriers to Planning for Children in Foster Care (1976) Regional Research Institute for Human Services Portland State University;

2. 2. Overcoming Barriers for Children in Care, (Emlen et al. 1977);

3. 3. Permanent Planning for Children in Foster Care: A Handbook for Social Workers (Pike et al.) 1977);

4. 4. Permanent Planning in Foster Care: A Guide for Programme Planners (Dreyer, 1978);

5. 5. Permanent Planning in Foster Care: Resources for Training (Downs & Taylor, 1978);

Every fourth morning in Melbourne a mother goes to pick up her baby from its cotonly to find that her baby is dead. This statement, which ignores the seasonalincidence of cot death, does indicate however both the frequency and the tragicdrama of cot death.

The first recorded case of probable cot death in Australia was recorded in 1810.I say probable as we have no means of knowing whether it would really fit thecurrently accepted definition of cot death which is “the sudden andunexpected death of an infant in whom a thorough post mortem examination doesnot disclose an adequate cause of death”. Some infants do die suddenlyand unexpectedly from diseases such as myocarditis, meningitis, andgastro-enteritis. But these conditions are readily recognised by the pathologistwho examines the baby after death. It is when he is unable to find evidence ofany such lethal disease after a thorough examination that he records his verdictas cot death, or as it is usually labelled these days, Sudden Infant DeathSyndrome or SIDS.

The purpose of this article is to set forth some ethical practice guidelines for human service workers with less than professional qualifications.’ The growing awareness of social, behavioural and mental health problems in our society ranging from hyper-active children who cannot read to depressed housewives who cannot cope, has resulted in the need for more personnel in the human service fields. Increasingly, the helping professionals have been aided and abetted in their work by a growing number of aids or assistants who work undertheirdirection inthefields of psychiatry, psychology, social work, nursing, the ministry, the law and vocational and educational counselling. Sometimes referred to as the “new careers worker” (Golann and Eisdorfer: 1972) or the “new professional” (Dugger: 1975), such workers may have some preparation, some on-the-job staff development, but will have less than the traditional professional training. Among these workers are many individuals, mostly women who are utilized for their nurturing, home-making skills so important in residential settings for children and in foster homes. There are also workers who are indigenous to low-income or minority group areas who possess important knowledge for promoting programs and special skills at case finding. (Pearl and Reissman: 1965) In addition there are volunteers of all kinds, including former clients, working in both conventional and atypical agencies. Honorary Probationary Officers alone number approximately 900 in Victoria in 1980 and constitute a major support for individuals on probation. All of these workers face, just as professionals do, complex and ambiguous ethical questions.

This article examines some of the policies and assumptions behind the government’s fiscal policies and family support.

The responsibility for dependent children has become lost in a ‘no mans land’ somewhere between the wages system, the government, and the family itself.

Of particular concern is the erosion of the real value of income, allowance and other support (eg. child care, refuges etc.) for poor families. Alongside the government’s oft quoted concern for the needy has been the actual fall in wellbeing of those most in need (eg. single parents, the unemployed, low income families) while other more traditional family notions have been supported (eg. dependent spouse rebate). In some instances this redistribution has occurred through active policies (eg. family allowances) while in other cases they have come about by ‘non policies’ (eg. failure to index allowances for single parents).

Parents invariably experience great emotional distress when they are informedthat their child is intellectually handicapped. From working with parents ofintellectually handicapped children, it appears that they experience moreanxiety with their child than do parents of normal children, and often havespecial needs. These needs may vary from requiring assistance to adjust to theirchild’s condition, to advice and guidance about how to manage theirchild. It is apparent from talking with parents about their experiences withtheir intellectually handicapped child, that often their needs have not or haveonly superficially been met by professionals. Some cases have been adequatelydealt with, however, in general there appear to be discrepancies in theavailability of assistance for parents of intellectually handicapped children.There is a need to bring into focus the situation as it now exists for parentswhen they are told of their child’s handicap. The time when parents aretold of their child’s handicap is a crucial one for parents, and perhapsnot enough is being done to help parents at this time.

Notes for Talk at Conference on Women and Taxation Organised by United Nations Association of Australia Melbourne 12-14 June 1981

Last year, on behalf of the National Women’s Advisory Council, I undertook an exploratory survey to obtain information on the ways in which married couples arrange their financial affairs. Much of social policy is based on the assumption that husband and wife pool their income and that the welfare of an individual family member can be determined by reference to total family income irrespective of its source. This assumption is convenient to policy makers and social analysts which is a probable reason for its perpetuation. But this does not justify its continued use in the absence of supporting evidence. The survey was motivated by a concern that social policy decisions, which at present are made on largely intuitive grounds, should, rather, be based on facts about the extent to which families pooled income and shared in its benefits.

“Day Care” is a subject which tends to polarise opinion; to the single parent or the economically struggling two parent family, the adult who genuinely wants to work or the student who is also a parent, the concept is most acceptable and very welcome. Day care fulfils a very real need for these people in our society which has managed to separate families into nuclear units and deprived them of the support of the extended family. Day care for these people enables them to pursue a livelihood or studies to lead to a livelihood and clearly in this context day care serves the parent or parents involved. There are other situations however, in which day care is perceived as being of consumate value to the child involved. There is a growing body of psychologists, neurologists and educators who believe that the first three years of life constitute the most crucial stage of development, in that all later learning depends upon the cognitive and social gains made by the infant. It therefore follows that exponents of this philosophy would have us believe that the infant/toddler must be in the most advantageous environment at his disposal, and that for some infants and toddlers an impoverished, unstimulating home is not the most ideal environment.

In an earlier article, the developments which occurred in child protective policy in Victoria during the nineteen sixties and seventies were described. This article examines the current policy as expressed in the relevant government legislation and the policies of the Department for Community Welfare Services. The current policy is then compared with the previous policies.

Most readers will be aware of Rosemary Crossley’s work with Anne McDonaldand the court case which gave Anne permission to leave the institution and livewith Rosemary. The following article reflects Rosemary’s strong concernwith respect to the care of residents of institutions. We publish the paperbecause it reflects the personal view of someone who has been involved in thecare of children with disability.

In this International Year of the Disabled Person, the needs of all persons with a disability are being look at more critically, but perhaps the general public is more aware of adults with a disability, than of young children. Young children with disabilities are not a vocal group as such, although their parents are becoming increasingly vocal and banding together into effective Action Groups. Young children with disabilities may be thought to be “cute”, and the general public is relieved that they have parents who are responsible for them. But those same children experience acute frustrations, and their parents experience chronic grief because their child is unable to lead a normal life. Many find it necessary to expend a tremendous amount of time and emotional effort on the physical care and intellectual stimulation of their child, and in many cases, the increased financial demands can be critical for the family budget.

In 1970 a medical student walked out of an examination room in a Radiology Department of a large teaching hospital saying, “I think that is barbaric, holding down a screaming child to have a bladder x-ray”. At the time I thought she was over-reacting. After all, the child needed to have an x-ray examination of the bladder (MCU) and a kidney x-ray (IVP) to assess whether there were any organic abnormalities predisposing her two urinary infections with possible renal damage.

Some time later a mother returned to her referring paediatrician with a very distorted account of what had happened to her three year old daughter undergoing an x-ray examination of the bladder and kidneys.

When Care-Force was first established in Preston in 1976 we had the noble objective of creating a community based family agency providing a range of supportive services to develop and strengthen family functioning and prevent children having to go into institutional care. We aimed to be flexible, respond to family needs as we found them, supplement rather than duplicate any other services available in the community and find new ways of working with family problems.

We feel that in some ways we have been able to carry out some of these objectives, but there have been difficulties and frustrations which have hampered the planning and development of the services we have tried to create.

In dealing with alcohol abuse, a focus on the family is of importance.Conversely, in dealing with problematic children or families there is goodreason to recognise the possibility of alcohol abuse. Awareness of the possibleadaptiveness of alcohol in the family may assist the professional in helping thefamily to move.

Between the writing of my article and its publication in the last issue of Australian Child and Family Welfare my critique of St Nicholas Hospital was overtaken by events.

On September 4th the State Government announced that it was proposing to demolish St Nicholas, sell the site and rehouse the residents in small family group homes in the community. This has since then been confirmed as official government policy.

This article attempts to highlight the difficulties of families with sick children in the hope that personnel involved with them could be more aware and assist where possible.

unexplored area in Australian research. Literature on the topic of military base-host community relations in specific is practically nonexistent, in Australia and elsewhere. Those case-studies which have been made (Barth, 1952; Hunter, 1952; Palmer, 1977) reveal that the military community represents a kind of foreign settlement in a civilian locality, that relations more often than not are uneasy and even exploitative in such matters as housing, and that the military style of life in general thwarts civil-military social integration.

The communal nature of the military organisation in its own right has been noted by Kilmartin (1974; 444):

How the wives and families of servicemen experience service lifestyle, military communalism and isolation from civilian host comunities is the concern of this paper.