Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Institutional Oppression That Silences Child Protection Reform

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Journal on Child Maltreatment: Research, Policy and Practice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

From its inception, child protection policy has been infused with domination, and over the long arc of history has been accompanied by the spread of institutional oppression. A case study of Australian child protection policy and practice illustrates how Iris Marion Young’s (1992) five faces of oppression ((a) exploitation, (b) marginalization, (c) cultural imperialism, (d) powerlessness, and (e) violence) have pervaded the child protection system across time. Further, a secondary analysis of data from the Capacity Building Projects (2008–13) shows how oppression silences families, carers, community workers, and government child protection workers. Informal care networks, restorative justice, and responsive regulation enable silenced voices to be heard but remain at the fringes of child protection practice. Their potential will be reached only with a whole-of-child-protection regulatory refit in which open networks of dialogue are prioritized over networks of oppressive control.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.aihw.gov.au/child-protection-publications

  2. Gair and Croker (2007–8) note that young Aboriginal mothers were more likely to resist pressure because they were not afraid to go home with their babies.

  3. Director-general of child protection services in Western Australia: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-03-27/outgoing-child-protection-head-reflects-on-a-tough-job/5349534; Deputy chief executive of Families South Australia: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/education-and-child-development-department-deputy-chief-executive-david-waterford-quits-in-wake-of-families-sa-child-abuse-scandal/story-fni6uo1m-1227004314797.

  4. https://www3.aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/economic-costs-child-abuse-and-neglect

  5. With New Public Management came greater outsourcing which brought a variety of different perspectives into the child protection space. Arguably any progress with reform has been a consequence of outsourcing. See the work of Aboriginal Cooperatives in Victoria as one example of change being ushered in by a non-government organization with powers to shape child protection practices: http://dhhs.vic.gov.au/publications/aboriginal-children-aboriginal-care-program

  6. There are many excellent accounts by those who have worked within the system and sought reform, for example, see the articles of Kate Alexander and Paul Nixon in the reference list.

References

  • Adams, P., & Chandler, S. M. (2004). Responsive regulation in child welfare: Systemic challenges to mainstreaming the family group conference. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 31, 93–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, K. (2014). Belief and ability: Essential qualities of an effective child protection workforce. Developing Practice, 39 July, 4–14.

  • Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2020). Child protection. Canberra: AIHW. Viewed 02 January 2021, https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/child-protection. Accessed 2 Apr 2021.

  • Becroft, A. (2017). Family group conferences: Still New Zealand’s gift to the world?. Office of the Children’s Commissioner. https://www.occ.org.nz/assets/Uploads/OCC-SOC-Dec-2017-Companion-Piece.pdf. Accessed 2 Apr 2021.

  • Braithwaite, J. (2014). Evidence for restorative justice. Vermont Bar Journal, 40(2), 18–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, F., Broadhurst, D., & Hawkins, R. (2004). Violence, threats and intimidation in the lives of professionals whose work involves children. Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broadhurst, K., & Mason, C. (2013). Maternal outcasts: Raising the profile of women who are vulnerable to successive, compulsory removals of their children–a plea for preventative action. Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 35(3), 291–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burford, G. (2005). Families: Their role as architects of civil society and social inclusion. Practice, 17, 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burford, G., & Adams, P. (2004). Restorative justice, responsive regulation and social work. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 31(1), 7–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burford, G., Braithwaite, J., & Braithwaite, V. (2019). Restorative and responsive human services. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Burford, G., & Hudson, J. (Eds.). (2000). Family group conferencing: New directions in community-centered child and family practice. Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burford, G., & Pennell, J. (1998). Family Group Decision Making Project: Outcome report, Vol. I. St. John’s, Memorial University.

  • Connolly, M. (2006). Fifteen years of family group conferencing: Coordinators talk about their experiences in Aotearoa New Zealand. British Journal of Social Work, 36(4), 523–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Australian Governments. (2009). Protecting children is everyone’s business: National framework for protecting Australia’s children 2009–2020. Implementing the first three-year action plan, 2009–2012. FaHCSIA.

  • Davis, M. (2019). Family is culture, independent review into Aboriginal out-of-home-care in NSW. New South Wales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dingwall, R., Eekelaar, J., & Murray, T. (1995). The protection of children: State intervention and family life. (revised). Avebury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Featherstone, B., White, S., & Morris, K. (2014). Re-imagining child protection: Towards humane social work with families. Policy Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gair, S. & Croker, F. (2007/8) Missing voices about a foreign place: Exploring midwifery practice with single mothers and their babies for adoption Queensland 1960–1990. Journal of Interdisciplinary Gender Studies, 10(2), 56–67.

  • Gal, T. (2015). Restorative child protection. Available at SSRN 2694399.

  • Gooda, M. (2016). The road to safety isn’t always clear, but children’s rights must come first. The Sydney Morning Herald, March 9.

  • Grabosky, P. N. (1995). Using non-governmental resources to foster regulatory compliance. Governance, 8(4), 527–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, S. & Braithwaite, V. (2014). Complex lives, complex needs, complex service systems: Community worker perspectives on the needs of families involved with ACT Care and Protection Services. Regulatory Institutions Network Occasional Paper 21. Australian National University.

  • Hamilton, S., Cleland, D., & Braithwaite, V. (2020). ‘Why can’t we help protect children too?’ Stigma by association among community workers in child protection and its consequences. Community Development Journal, 55(3), 452–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, N. (2008). Family group conferencing in Australia 15 years on. Child Abuse Prevention Issues, 27, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, N. (2011). Does responsive regulation offer an alternative? Questioning the role of formalistic assessment in child protection investigations. British Journal of Social Work, 41(7), 1383–1403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, N. (2012). Assessment: When does it help and when does it hinder? Parents’ experiences of the assessment process. Child & Family Social Work, 17(2), 180–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, N., & Gosnell, L. (2012). From the perspective of parents: Interviews following a child protection investigation. Regulatory Institutions Network Occasional Paper 21. Australian National University.

  • Harris, N. & Wood, J. (2008). Governing beyond command and control: a responsive and nodal approach to child protection. In Mathieu Deflem (ed), Surveillance and governance: Crime control and beyond, sociology of crime, law and deviance. Emerald Group Publishing.

  • Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. (1997). Bringing them home: Report of the national inquiry into the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander children from their families. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S., Goddard, C., Cooper, J., Littlechild, B., & Wild, J. (2016). ‘If I feel like this, how does the child feel?’: Child protection workers, supervision, management and organisational responses to parental violence. Journal of Social Work Practice, 30(1), 5–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivec, M. (2013). A necessary engagement: an international review of parent and family engagement in child protection. Anglicare.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ivec, M., Braithwaite, V. & Harris, N. (2009). ‘Resetting the relationship’ in Indigenous child protection: Public hope and private reality. (full report) Regulatory Institutions Network Occasional Paper 14. Australian National University.

  • Ivec, M., Braithwaite, V., & Harris, N. (2012). ‘Resetting the relationship’ in Indigenous child protection: Public hope and private reality. Law and Policy, 34(1), 80–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ivec, M., Braithwaite, V., & Reinhart, M. (2011). A national survey on perceptions of how child protection authorities work 2010: the perspective of third parties – preliminary findings, Regulatory Institutions Network Occasional Paper 16. Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, J. (2000). The New Public Management in Australia. Administrative Theory and Praxis, 22(2), 345–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leamy, M., Bird, V., Le Boutillier, C., Williams, J., & Slade, M. (2011). A conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. British Journal of Psychiatry, 199, 445–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levine, M., & Levine, A. (1970). A social history of helping services; Clinic, court, school, and community. Appleton-Century-Crofts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lonne, B., Harries, M., Featherstone, B., & Gray, M. (2016). Working ethically in child protection. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lonne, B., Harries, M., & Lantz, S. (2013). Workforce development: a pathway to reforming child protection systems in Australia. British Journal of Social Work, 43(8), 1630–1648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Losoncz, I. (2013). The unintended consequences of government intervention in South Sudanese Australian families: Repairing the legitimacy of care and protection authorities among migrant communities. RegNet Research Paper No. 2013/21.

  • Lupton, C., & Nixon, P. (1999). Empowering practice? A critical appraisal of the Family Group Conference approach. The Policy Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, C. A., Browne, J., Taylor, J., & Davis, D. (2015). Guilty until proven innocent? - The assumption of care of a baby at birth. Women and Birth, 28, 65–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maslen, S., & Hamilton, S. L. (2020). ‘Can you sleep tonight knowing that child is going to be safe?’: Australian community organisation risk work in child protection practice. Health, Risk & Society, 22(5–6), 346–361.

  • Mathiesen, T. (2004). Silently silenced: Essays on the creation of acquiescence in modern society. Waterside Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McArthur, M., Braithwaite, V., Winkworth, G., Wilson, F., Conroy, S., Thomson, B., Ivec, M., Harris, N., & Reinhart, M. (2011). How relevant is the role of values in child protection practice? A national survey of child protection staff 2009 – Preliminary findings, Regulatory Institutions Network Occasional Paper 17. Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLeigh, J. (2013). How to form alliances with families and communities. Child Abuse and Neglect, 37S, 17–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melton, G. (2013). ‘Programs’ aren’t enough. Child Abuse and Neglect, 37S, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melton, G. & Thompson, R. (2002). The conceptual foundation: Why child protection should be neighbourhood-based and child-centred. In G. Melton, R. Thompson and M. Small (eds), Towards a child-centred, neighbourhood-based child protection system: a report on the consortium on children, families and the law, Praeger.

  • Merkel-Holguin, L. (2004). Sharing power with the people: Family group conferencing as a democratic experiment. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 31(1), 155–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, K., & Featherstone, B. (2010). Investing in children, regulating parents, thinking family: a decade of tensions and contradictions. Social Policy and Society, 9(4), 557–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, K., Hughes, N., Clarke, H., Tew, J., Mason, P., Galvani, S., Lewis, A., Loveless, L., Becker, S., & Burford, G. (2008). Think Family: a literature review of whole family approaches. Social Exclusion Task Force.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munro, E. (2004). A simpler way to understand the results of risk assessment instruments. Children and Youth Services Review, 26(9), 873–883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munro, E. (2005). What tools do we need to improve identification of child abuse? Child Abuse Review, 14, 374–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musgrove, N. (2015). Locating foster care: Place and space in care leavers’ childhood memories. The Journal of the History of Childhood and Youth, 8(1), 106–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nixon, P., Burford, G., Quinn, A., & Edelbaum, J. (2005). A survey of international practices, policy & research on family group conferencing and related practices. Family Rights Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Sullivan, D. (2019). Racism alleged as indigenous children taken from families – even though state care often fails them. The Conversation, May 14. https://theconversation.com/racism-alleged-as-indigenous-children-taken-from-families-even-though-state-care-often-fails-them-116984.

  • Parker, C., & Braithwaite, J. (2003). Regulation. In P. Cane & M. Tushnet (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Legal Studies. (pp. 119–145). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parton, N. (2014). The Politics of Child Protection. Palgrave MacMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pennell, J. (2006). Restorative practices and child welfare: Toward an inclusive civil society. Journal of Social Issues, 62(2), 259–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennell, J., & Burford, G. (2000). Family group decision making: Protecting children and women. Child Welfare, 79(2), 131–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Productivity Commission. (2020). Child Protection Services (Part F, Section 16). In Report on Government Services. Productivity Commission, Australian Government. https://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/report-on-government-services/2020/community-services/child-protection. Accessed 2 Apr 2021.

  • Quartly, M., Swain, S., & Cuthbert, D. (2013). The market in babies: Stories of Australian adoption. Monash University Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, J. (1996). Research on family group conferences in child welfare in New Zealand. In J. Hudson, M. Allison, G. Maxwell, & B. Gallaway (Eds.), Family group conferences. (pp. 49–64). Federation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, D., & Swain, S. (2002). Confronting cruelty: Historical perspectives on child protection in Australia. Melbourne University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senate Community Affairs References Committee. (2004). Forgotten Australians: A report on Australians who experienced institutional or out-of-home care as children. Australian Government.

  • Senate Community Affairs References Committee. (2012). Commonwealth contribution to former forced adoption policies and practices. Australian Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strazdins, L. (2000). Integrating emotions: Multiple role measurement of emotional work. Australian Journal of Psychology, 52, 41–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swain, S. (2014). History of Australian inquiries reviewing institutions providing care for children. Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain, S., & Howe, R. (1996). Single mothers and their children: Disposal, punishment and survival in Australia. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomison, A. M. (2001). A history of child protection: Back to the future. Family Matters, 60, 46–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsantefski, M., Parkes, A., Tidyman, A., & Campion, M. (2013). An extended family for life for children affected by parental substance dependence. Family Matters, 93, 74–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warner, J. (2015). The emotional politics of social work and child protection. Policy Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • White, A. (2005). Literature review: Assessment of parenting capacity. Centre for Parenting and Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (1992). Five faces of oppression. In T. E. Wartenberg (Ed.), Rethinking power. (pp. 174–195). State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Regulation and Global Governance, College of Asia and the Pacific, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Valerie Braithwaite

Authors
  1. Valerie Braithwaite
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valerie Braithwaite.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Braithwaite, V. Institutional Oppression That Silences Child Protection Reform. Int. Journal on Child Malt. 4, 49–72 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42448-021-00068-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42448-021-00068-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation