Brotherhood Comment November 2010

Brotherhood Of St Laurence

Description

ISSN 1320 8632A regul Ar upd At e from the r e se Ar ch An d policy centreNovember 2010Revaluing care Gender, justice and equalityCare is central to human society, but many young women, motherhood private’ and the consequences of it is often understood as peripheral and the associated decisions about such a ‘private’ decision are seen to the real business of economic child care are their first encounters as beyond the scope of social progress. One reason for this is with the marginalisation of care policy (Lewis 2009, p.17).that generally care is unpaid or and its consequences. For others the low-paid. As Jane Lewis observes, catalyst may be an accident, sudden The concept of ‘affective equality’ in ‘most countries economic policy illness or the increasing frailty of proposed by Irish scholars Lynch, has tended to take priority over a relative. The questions: who is Baker and Lyons (2009) neatly social policy’ (2009, p. 9). The going to provide care? on what addresses the dilemma that Jane primacy of the economic over terms? at what cost? are not only Lewis has identified. Rather other realms of life has serious deeply personal, they are questions than using the idea of choice as implications for social cohesion of public policy. Importantly, the a means of analysing policy, as and gender justice, because the answers tend to be shaped by one’s Lewis does—which then raises ‘burdens and benefits’ (Lynch gender, class, ethnicity or ‘race’, issues about the ...

Informations

• Publié par: Enya
• Nombre de lectures: 50
• Langue: English

Extrait

A r e gul A r u p d At e f rom t he r e se A r ch A n d p o licy centre

ISSN 1320 8632 November 2010

Revaluing care Gender, justice and equality Care is central to human society, but many young women, motherhood private ’ and the consequences of it is often understood as peripheral and the associated decisions about such a ‘private’ decision are seen to the real business of economic child care are their first encounters as beyond the scope of social progress. One reason for this is with the marginalisation of care policy (Lewis 2009, p.17). that generally care is unpaid or and its consequences. For others the low-paid. As Jane Lewis observes, catalyst may be an accident, sudden The concept of ‘affective equality’ in ‘most countries economic policy illness or the increasing frailty of proposed by Irish scholars Lynch, has tended to take priority over a relative. The questions: who is  Baker and Lyons (2009) neatly social policy’ (2009, p. 9). The going to provide care? on what  addresses the dilemma that Jane primacy of the economic over terms? at what cost? are not only  Lewis has identified. Rather other realms of life has serious deeply personal, they are questions  than using the idea of choice as implications for social cohesion of public policy. Importantly, the  a means of analysing policy, as and gender justice, because the answers tend to be shaped by one’s  Lewis does—which then raises ‘burdens and benefits’ (Lynch gender, class, ethnicity or ‘race’,  issues about the social and cultural 2009, p.2) of paid and unpaid work relationship status, and resources.  nature of choice—their idea of remain unequally distributed.  affective justice focuses on equity Jane Lewis identifies the dilemma  in caring for both men and women. Until comparatively recently in for feminists who support a  They argue for equity in both the Australia, participation in the woman’s right to choose to care  receipt and production of care. labour market was predicated on for her children. Supporting certain assumptions of the roles women’s choice to care may lock  Lynch (2007) has developed a of men and women (‘men provide, women into unpaid care work  taxonomy which is useful in women care’). In the latter half and deny access to the benefits  unpacking the amorphous nature of last century, second-wave that accrue from paid work. On  of care. She identifies primary, feminism fuelled reform, which the other hand, investing in paid  secondary and tertiary care saw the removal of many of the employment may come at the cost  relations, and the work associated policy and legislative barriers to of meeting important care needs  with each of these. Primary care women’s market participation. and nourishing deep relationships.  relations entail what Lynch calls Nevertheless, the ‘in-principle As Lewis points out, ‘the danger  ‘love labour’, the work involved and incomplete nature of these at the policy level is that a decision  in caring for one’s child, for changes is underscored by to opt for care work is treated as  example. More ‘general care work’ unequal pay, inadequate child and other care services, and Continued page 2 the lack of representation of Conte t women as directors of public n s companies, among other things’ Monitoring social exclusion: findings from a new multidimensional measure for Australia (Bowman 2009, p.169). The changing nature of ageing: an international perspective Debates about ‘work–family Ready set go: a good start for HIPPY children balance’ or ‘work–life balance’ highlight the tension between Turning up the heat: where to now for climate change policy? the need and desire to care and Aus om New Zealand the imperatives of labour market tralian social policy: a view fr participation. Often the focus is When words fail: language and ageism on child care and the competing Integrating youth services pressures to care for children Work in pro while also succeeding (or at least  gress participating) in the market. For Rebadged and refocused: the Brotherhood Information Centre

www.bsl.org.au

4–5 6–7 8–9 10 11 12 13 14 15

November 2010     1

Continued from page 1

is associated with secondary care relations, for example the time and effort one invests in friends, relatives or work colleagues, while what she calls ‘solidarity work ’ relates to those for whom we have ‘care responsibilities through statutory obligations at national or international levels, or for whom we care politically or economically through volunteering’ (Lynch 2007, p.556). Such work may include ‘campaigning for homeless people, prisoners’ rights or better welfare services, or working on global solidarity campaigns’ (2007, p.562). This taxonomy is useful in highlighting the interrelated and overlapping dimensions of care. It’s also useful in highlighting the centrality of care to both private and public life. Care is about more than looking after one’s children— although that is important. Caring is a responsibility and a resource; it enriches and enables, and it can be hard work. The ‘benefits and burdens’ of love, care and solidarity ( pace Lynch 2009) are unevenly distributed, but this is not fixed or inevitable. As Wilkinson and Picket (2009, pp.227–8) point out: ... rather than assuming that we are stuck with levels of self interested consumerism, individualism and materialism which must defeat any attempts to develop sustainable economic systems, we need to recognise that these are not fixed expressions of human nature ... At the most fundamental level, what reducing inequality is about is shifting the balance from the divisive self interested consumerism

driven by status competition towards a more socially integrated and affiliative society. Greater equality can help us develop the public ethos and commitment in working together which we need if we are going to solve the problems which threaten us all. The big idea is that a more equal, caring society is better for everyone (Wilkinson & Pickett 2009). Importantly, an ethic of care extends to the environment, other species, the future and ways of being. It recognises the primacy of care and the importance of dignity, compassion, generosity and justice. Dina Bowman [phone] [e-mail] References Bowman, D 2009, ‘The deal: wives, entrepreneurial business and family life’, Journal of Family Studies , vol.15, no.2, pp.167–76. Lewis, J 2009, Work family balance, gender and policy , Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK. Lynch, K 2007, ‘Love labour as a distinct and non-commodifiable form of care labour’, The Sociological Review , vol.55, no.3, pp.550–70. Lynch, K 2009, ‘Affective equality: who cares?’, Development , vol. 52, no.3, pp.410–5. Lynch, K, Baker, J & Lyons, M with S Cantillon, J Walsh, M Feeley, N Hanlon & M O’Brien 2009, Affective equality: love, care and injustice , Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK. Wilkinson, R & Pickett, K 2009, The spirit level: why more equal societies almost always do better , Penguin, London.

Recent policy submissions Submissions or statements made by the Brotherhood of St Laurence in the last year include: • Response to the Aged Care Complaints Investigation Scheme Consultation Paper Department of Health and Ageing, August 2009 • The contribution of the not-for-profit sector: submission in response to the draft report of the Productivity Commission, December 2009 • Submission to the Senate Committee inquiry into social security and other legislation amendment bills, February 2010 • Submission to the Family and Community Development Committee Inquiry into the Adequacy and Future Directions of Public Housing in Victoria, February 2010 • Response to Australian Energy Regulator (AER) issues paper on retail energy pricing information guidelines, April 2010 • Response to Treasury options paper on unfair terms in insurance contracts, April 2010 • Submission to the review of the implementation of Securing Jobs for Your Future – Skills for Victoria, joint submission by Melbourne Citymission, Brotherhood of St Laurence and Good Shepherd Youth and Family Service, May 2010 • Response to the DEECD Directions Paper Pathways to re‑engagement through flexible learning options , May 2010 • Response to the Stronger futures for all young Victorians   discussion paper on the youth transitions system, June 2010 • Submission to Senate Economics Committee Inquiry into the Banking Amendment Bill 2010, July 2010 • Submission to Caring for Older Australians: Productivity Commission [inquiry], July 2010 • Submission to the National Advisory Council on Mental Health regarding ‘Daily bread, income and living with mental illness’, August 2010 • Submission to the Treasury’s National Credit Reform Green Paper, August 2010 • Submission to the Australian Communications and Media   Authority (ACMA) Reconnecting the Customer consultation, September 2010 Policy submissions can be accessed on our website at <http://www.bsl.org.au/Research-and-Publications/Publications/ Policy-submissions.aspx>

Brotherhood Comment is published three times a year by the Research and Policy Centre of the Brotherhood of St Laurence. The Brotherhood of St Laurence works not just to alleviate but to prevent poverty, focusing on people at the greatest risk at key life transitions. It is a national voice on matters of disadvantage, understanding that poverty’s remedy lies in integrating social and economic policy so as to strengthen the capacities of individuals and communities. Its research, service development and delivery, and advocacy aim to address unmet needs and translate the learning into new policies, programs and practices for implementation by governments and others.

2    

oNvember  2010 

Published in November 2010 by Brotherhood of St Laurence 67 Brunswick Street Fitzroy, Victoria 3065, Australia ABN 24 603 467 024 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Email: [e-mail]

ww.wsb.lorg.au

From the General Manager

Working for social policy change can often seem like watching the grass grow. While the day-to-day growth may be imperceptible, with time the change is unmistakeable. The case of the social inclusion agenda in Australia is an excellent example. Adopted by the Rudd government three years ago, it has often been dismissed as ambiguous and ephemeral. Yet as 2010 draws to a close, as I report elsewhere in this issue, the reframing of Australian social policy around concepts like ‘social investment’ and the ‘inclusive society’ sets Australia starkly apart from a country like New Zealand which is currently immersed in the kind of ‘welfare war’ which we experienced back at the turn of the century. The installation of the new Gillard government has become a time for us to take stock of this agenda and its potential further iterations. Of great interest in this regard is the October visit to the Brotherhood of the distinguished British social policy academic, Professor Ruth Lister. Ruth gave the 2010 Sambell Oration and also the opening address to our symposium on Care, Social Inclusion and Citizenship, hosted in collaboration with the Social Policy Research Centre at the University of New South Wales, the Centre for Work + Life, at the University of South Australia, and the Centre for Public Policy at the University of Melbourne. She spoke of the importance of developing a vision of the ‘good society’ which integrates our economic, social and environmental values. In our front page article, Dina Bowman argues that this will require greater emphasis and value being given to the place of caring in our policy mix. Flexicurity Across the year, a key project aimed at delivering such a new policy mix has been our exploration of

www.bsl.org.au 

the relevance to the Australian context of the European concept of ‘flexicurity’, combining a flexible labour market with a generous benefit system and active employment assistance programs. To this end we are engaged in ongoing dialogue with business, union, government and community leaders, including the Business Council of Australia and the Australian Council of Trade Unions. The report from our June roundtable, together with several of the presentations, is now accessible on our website. Measuring social exclusion Our collaborative project to develop and apply indicators of social exclusion with the Melbourne Institute is well advanced. Michael Horn describes the basket of indicators chosen to capture the multiple dimensions of exclusion, and presents some initial findings about the level, extent and persistence of exclusion based on analysis of HILDA data. Planning is underway to publish and update our findings on the web, to build wider understanding of the concept of social exclusion. Through the life course We have warmly welcomed Simon Biggs to our second joint professorial position between the School of Social and Political Sciences at the University of Melbourne and the Research and Policy Centre. From Kings College in London, Simon has wasted no time in adding new strategic direction to our research on retirement and ageing. In this issue, he outlines some changing international perspectives on ageing, which challenge the notion of older people as a burden on society. Meanwhile, Michael Clyne and Helen Kimberley warn about the prevalence of ageist language which can work against social inclusion.

Sharon Bond’s review of literature related to integrated youth services has shed light on some key considerations for the development of youth centres to prevent or overcome disadvantage. This will inform the Brotherhood’s work at the Frankston High Street Centre and plans for Caroline Springs. In the early years area, Tony Barnett, Fatou Diallo Roost and Juliet McEachran with Max Liddell of Monash University have prepared an interim report from their national evaluation of HIPPY (the Home Interaction Program for Parents and Youngsters). Reader survey Thank you to those who took the time to respond to our survey enclosed with the August issue mailout. Your feedback confirmed that readers use Comment to keep informed about our projects and the changing policy context. While some prefer to receive a hard copy, others would be happy with an electronic version—and indeed our list of online subscribers has grown steadily since the launch of our new website. Please visit the website for the latest research reports, papers and events—as well as the new resources (wiki timeline, historic photographs) provided by the Brotherhood’s Information Centre (and described by Louise Segafredo on page 15). Paul Smyth [phone] [e-mail]

oNevmber 0201     3

Monitoring social exclusion Findings from a new multidimensional measure for Australia The Brotherhood of St Laurence and Domains of exclusion This led to the identification of a the Melbourne Institute of Applied  The final project methodology  basket of 29 indicators, which could Economic and Social Research  constructed a measure of social  be aggregated to give a measure commenced a collaborative effort  exclusion based on seven domains:  of social exclusion in Australia. in 2008 to develop a new measure  material resources; employment; of social exclusion. The first stage  education and skills; health and  The second stage of the project of this innovative project devised  disability; social connection; has measured the extent of social a robust conceptual approach,  community; and personal safety. exclusion using data from the which was finalised after extensive consultations with some of the best Table 1 Incidence of social exclusion: individual indicators (2007) policy thinkers in Australia (see Scutella, Wilkins & Horn 2009). Domain Indicator % of population Our approach recognises aged 15+ that social exclusion is by its years nature multidimensional and 19.9 its extent, persistence, causes 38.0 and consequences cannot be 12.8 understood solely by looking at the cash incomes of individuals or households. Until recently the most 6.3 usual approach to show the extent 0.6 of disadvantage in Australia has 3.4 been to assess the level of income- 9.7 based poverty, for example using 16.5 the Henderson poverty line. The advent of the important concept 12.2 of social inclusion in Europe 3.1 has led to consideration of more appropriate measures of exclusion, 4.6 recognising its multidimensional 2.7 elements that go beyond personal 36.2 resources to include external 11.3 or structural barriers to social or economic participation. For 18.3 example, lack of accessible 10.9 health services, non-completion 10.0 of formal education, long-term 26 2 . unemployment and homelessness 3.6 act individually or together to limit or prevent participation in society. 1.4 10.6 Why is this so important? If Australia is to significantly reduce 1.6 the current level of disadvantage in our community, maximise 4.5 wellbeing and strengthen economic 13.9 productivity, it is essential to have a rigorous measure of the 18.8 number of people experiencing 23.3 social exclusion as a benchmark to monitor the effectiveness of 1.6 government social policies. 5.1 4.3

4     November  2010 

Material Household income less than 60% of median resources Household net worth less than 60% of median Consumption expenditure less than 60% of median Three or more indicators of financial stress Employment Long-term unemployed Unemployed Unemployed or marginally attached Unemployed, marginally attached or underemployed In a jobless household Education Low literacy and skills Low numeracy Poor English proficiency Low level of formal education Little or no work experience Health and Poor general health disability Poor physical health Poor mental health Long-term health condition or disability Household with a disabled child Social Little social support connection Get-together with friends/relatives less than once a month Community Low neighbourhood quality Low satisfaction with neighbourhood Low satisfaction with ‘feeling part of local communit ’ y Not currently a member of a club or association No voluntary activity in a typical week Personal Victim of physical violence in the last 12 months safety Victim of property crime in the last 12 months Low level of satisfaction with ‘how safe you feel’

www.bsl.org.au

national Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey for the period from 2001 to 2007 (Scutella, Wilkins & Kostenko 2009). Table 1 shows the percentage of the population aged 15 and over experiencing each indicator of exclusion across the seven domains. Thus, for example, 38 per cent of the population were ‘asset poor’ in 2007; and 26 per cent had a long-term health condition or disability. The prevalence of several other indicators was relatively low: these indicators included long-term unemployment, poor neighbourhood quality and past experience of physical violence. Extent of exclusion The analysis has enabled, for the first time, an estimate of the extent, depth and persistence of exclusion experienced by individuals and households. Over the period 2001–07, the level of marginal exclusion ranged between 26 and 33 per cent of the Australian population aged 15 years and over. Between four and six per cent were ‘deeply excluded’ and less than one per cent were ‘very deeply excluded’. The classification into marginal, deep or very deep exclusion is based on a summation method that gives equal weight to the indicators in each domain. For example, an individual counted as deeply excluded will most likely be experiencing at least four of the indicators across at least two domains. The prevalence of marginal exclusion may be compared with just over 20 per cent of the population aged 15 and over in households with incomes below 60 per cent of median equivalised household income (Figure 1). Strong employment growth between 2001 and 2007 led to a fall in measured exclusion over this period. However, it has not had a discernible impact on income

www.bsl.org.au

poverty as a relative measure. Since Further development absolute gains in employment  The partners have committed to in particular translate to lower  continue the project through 2011, measured social exclusion, social  with an immediate focus on two exclusion will in general be more  components: an annual bulletin sensitive to the business cycle  based on analyses of the most than relative income poverty.  recent HILDA data, and a website to raise community understanding Consistent with most measures of  of social inclusion and the extent disadvantage, women experience  of exclusion in Australia. About one in 20 higher rates of exclusion than men. Australians faces Young people (under 25 years) and  Regular reporting of the extent of deep exclusion o e l x d p e e r r   i a e d n u c l e t   s h  ( ig 55 h   e y r e  r a a r t s  e p s  l o u f s   ) e  a x l c s lu o  si social exclusion will provide an  for thr a e n e  d o   r more  on. independent monitor of the progress years, one achieved by governments over i s n o  e m ig e  h l t e  f v a el c   e o s f     Single parents have particularly  the next decade. We also plan to exclusion for at high rates of marginal and deep  report on themes emerging from the least five years. exclusion, with lone-person  analysis, such as barriers faced at households also prone to exclusion.  different stages in the life course. Other disadvantaged groups include Indigenous Australians, Michael Horn persons born in non-English [phone] speaking countries, persons in [e-mail] rental accommodation (with public housing residents the most References prone to exclusion), persons with Scutella, R, Wilkins, R & Kostenko, W 2009,   Estimates of poverty and social exclusion l p o e n rs g o -t n e s r   m w   h hea h lt a h co o n t d   i c t o io m n p s l   e a t n e d d     in Australia: a multidimensional approach , o ve n Working Paper No.26/09, Melbourne Institute secondary school (or its equivalent). of Applied Economic and Social Research and the Brotherhood of St Laurence, Melbourne. Examination of the persistence Scutella, R, Wilkins, R & Horn, M 2009, of exclusion over time shows, as Measuring poverty and social exclusion in expected, that short-term exclusion Australia: a proposed multidimensional e nt t framework for identifying socio‑economic i p s  er m si o s r t e e  f n r t e q x ue lio h n a .  n  N lo o n n g et -t h e e r le m s , s   ,  disadvantage , Working Paper No.04/09, c us Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic about one in 20 Australians faces deep and Social Research and the Brotherhood exclusion for three or more years, of St Laurence, Melbourne. and one in eight faces some level of exclusion for at least five years. Figure 1 Social exclusion and poverty levels in Australia, 2001 to 2007 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2001
2002
 2003
2004
2005
2006
2007 Marginal
exclusion
(Score>=1) Deep
exclusion
(Score>=2) Income
poverty
(60%
median
measure)

November 2010     5

The changing nature of ageing An international perspective It has now become commonplace to vision for living the second fifty suggest that an ageing population years (see Kimberley 2010). is a policy priority. And that this is a question for developing as well as Growing international interest for mature economies. However, In fact the UN is one of a what is less commonly recognised growing number of international is that this not simply a question of organisations that now circulate demographic change, but is also one  briefings, bulletins and working of meaning, and in particular the  papers on ageing populations: these meanings attributed to adult ageing  bodies include the World Health and later life. The United Nations  Organization, the Organisation for has held two world assemblies on  Economic and Cooperation and ageing, one in Vienna in 1982 and  Development, the International a second in Madrid in 2002. Both  Labour Organization, the World assemblies attempted to define  Bank and even the CIA. the essential role of older adults in society and it is interesting to  While each expresses a particular look at the differences between  concern about the numbers and the two. The first states that: distribution of older adults in A longer life provides humans i vari l o so u   s a     n c a o ti m on m a o l  n p  u o n p d u e l r a s ti t o a n n s d , i  t n h g e   re  with an opportunity to examine s a their lives in retrospect , to correct that there are not only more older some of their mistakes, to get people about, but that generally closer to the truth and to achieve speaking they are older, richer and a different understanding of the fitter than were their counterparts sense and value of their actions. in previous historical periods. ( Vienna International Plan of This conclusion is supported Action on Ageing, 1982 ) by evidence of a compression whereas Article Ten of  of morbidity, meaning that the second says:  people are living longer and also healthier lives (Fries 1980), that The potential of older persons decrements associated with old is a powerful basis for future   development . This enable e  s s  s k o il c l i s e , t   y  a a g n e d     a s r o e  m in et c i re m a e s s i  r n e g v l e y r   s m ib o l d e  i ( fi R a o bl w e  e &  t e o x   p r e el r y i   e i n n c c e r   e a a n s d in   g w l i y s   d o o n  m t   h of older  Kahn 1987) and by the growth of pension schemes (Phillipson 1998). persons, not only to take the lead in their own betterment but also to While these points have since been participate actively in that of society   contested, they are still the bedrock as a whole. ( Madrid International for thinking in this area. We have Plan of Action on Ageing 2002 ) moved from an understanding based on late-life dependency to one that A couple of the key words in  sees older people as potentially each have been put into bold  active consumers or continued type to illustrate the difference in  producers, or some combination. expectations of later life in only twenty years. The form of social The World Economic Forum inclusion envisaged by the two and ageing societies statements is very different. One  One of the international appears as a personal task looking  organisations to have recently begun backwards via a sifting of accrued  to look seriously at ageing is the experience; the second privileges the  World Economic Forum (WEF). The application of particular skills in the  WEF invites a number of groupings, here and now, as a springboard for  which include faith communities, future aspiration. The second also  industry partners, labour leaders, appears closer to the Brotherhood’s  non-government organisations,

6    

oNevmber  2010 

social entrepreneurs and academics, to meet under the banner of ‘Entrepreneurship in the global public interest’; and attracts heads of state to an annual summit in Davos, Switzerland. Although the Summit does not meet without controversy, the WEF continues to offer what it considers to be neutral ground for international discussion about key We have global risks, with an ambitious aim: moved from an understandin The World Economic Forum is based on late‑ g l   ife  an independent international dependency to organization committed to one that sees improving the state of the world by older people engaging leaders in partnerships as potentially to shape global, regional and active consumers industry agendas (WEF 2010a). or continued producers. The WEF divides its activities into eight priority areas: economic development and growth; environment and sustainability; finance and business; geopolitics and global governance; health; regions; society and values; and finally, technology and innovation. A Network of Global Agenda Councils was set up in 2008, to encourage dialogue across disciplinary and sectoral divides: In a global environment marked by short-term orientation and silo-thinking, Councils foster interdisciplinary and long-range thinking to address the prevailing challenges on the global agenda (WEF 2010b) Each Council comprises 15–20 members and serves as an advisory board to the Forum ‘and other interested parties such as governments and international organizations’. The new Council on Ageing Societies appears under the WEF classification of ‘drivers and trends’, which can be thought of as emerging issues that will potentially rise to the next level of ‘risks and opportunities’ in the near future.

ww.wsbl.org.au

Burden or benefit? In this initial period, the Council on Ageing Societies moved through a series of phases, with the first year dominated by ageing as a health issue, marked by a critical questioning of the evidence base underpinning anti-ageing technologies. The importance of this debate lay in the substantial preventative and commercial opportunities that might be promised, were the evidence to stand up. Unfortunately it did not. But an understanding emerged, from the work of Robert Butler (Butler et al. 2008), that ‘health begets wealth’, in so far as societies with healthy older populations also tend to be ones that generate greater wealth. The innovative contribution here was to suggest that adult ageing actively contributed to that wealth, rather than being a drain upon it. However the debate also relied heavily on older people as consumers, and in the second year the Council moved on to consider the ways in which older adults constituted a ‘human capital opportunity’ as producers and as socially engaged citizens. The problem was seen as lying in unsupportive environments and social attitudes that stop such engagement from taking place. In a forthcoming paper it is argued that the most critical influences on how societies adapt to adult ageing are social in form: Most important among them is the way in which we believe individuals and societies should be thinking about ageing relative to the myths, misconceptions, and lost opportunities that are common themes throughout the developed and developing world (Olshansky et al. in press). Lack of serious consideration of adult ageing, other than as a ‘threat’ or ‘burden’ on other generations’,

www.bsl.org.au 

and a relative absence of joined References up thinking between different Butler, RN, Miller, RA, Perry, D, et al. institutional responses have led d 2 i 0 se 0 a 8 s ,  e ‘  p N r e e w v   en m t o io d n el     f o o f r     h th e e a   lt 2 h 1   s p t  r c o e m nt o u ti r o y’ n ,     and  to a number of contradictions. British Medical Journal , no.337, pp.149–50 . What are the implications, for c F o ri m es p , r  J e F s   si 1 o 9 n 8   0 o , f     ‘ m A o gi r n bi g d ,  i n ty a ’ t ,  ur N a e l w d   e E at n h g   l a a n n d d     the example, of the development Journal of Medicine , vol.303, no.3, pp.130–5. xtendin of life-e g technologies Kimberley, H 2010, ‘A life that I value: f r o el r  a p ti e o n n s s io h n p b olicy? e   n W  p h u a b t  l i i s c     the  investigating capabilities and social inclusion The advantage of ip etwe of aged care clients’, Brotherhood Comment , policy that encourages productive August, pp.8–9. the WEF initiative d w e o m rk a f n o d rce ag h ei e n al g t   h a   n s d y   s c t h e a m n s  gi w n h g e   r Kohli, M 2005, ‘Generational changes and i a w s  g i t d e h i e n a r t   g   c   i i t o n     n p i t t l s e a   x c t es  s on e generational equity’, in ML Johnson (ed.), these exist? How can the policy Cambridge handbook of age and ageing , and fosters  s issues of ageing in the mature Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,     economies (for example, social pp.518–26. i m nv ul o t l i v ‑i e n m te e r n e t s . t  isolation and the retrenchment of Olshansky, JS, Biggs, S, Achenbaum, WA, services) and those of developing et al. (in press), ‘The Global Agenda Council economies (for example, historic on the Ageing Society: policy principles’, absence of services for ld age, Global Policy . o migration, interdependency between Phillipson, C 1998, Reconstructing    generations) learn from each ageing , Sage, London. other? (Olshansky et al. in press) Rowe, JW & Kahn, RL 1987, Successful aging , Pantheon, New York. Such questions are relevant, Turner, BS 1998, ‘Ageing and generational conflicts’, British Journal of Sociology , of course, to Australia—and to organisations such as the vol.49, no.2, pp.299–304. Brotherhood as it argues for World Economic Forum (WEF) 2010a, policies and services which will About the World Economic Forum , WEF, Geneva, viewed 12 October 2010, <http:// enhance the capabilities of older www.weforum.org/en/about/index.htm>. people and prevent the exclusion of disadvantaged groups. The — —2010b, The Network of Global advanta e of the WE Agenda Councils , WEF, Geneva, is that it  g placgeing F     i i n n   i i t t i s a   t w i i v d e  er  viewed 12 October 2010, es a <http://www.weforum.org/en/Communities/ contexts, fosters multi-interest GlobalAgendaCouncils/index.htm>.  involvement and looks for solutions that connect and have transnational applications. The thinking about ageing societies is in its early stages but is moving beyond the sense that issues exist, to working out how to respond to them. As such it offers the promise of solidarities between different age groups, whereas many contemporary commentators predict increasing intergenerational conflict (Kohli 2005; Turner 1998). It is, perhaps, a space worth watching. Simon Biggs [phone] [e-mail]

November 0210     7

Ready set go A good start for HIPPY children The first stage of the national  Stewart-Brown 2005) and cost- evaluation of HIPPY (the Home  effective (Hart & Risley 1995). Interaction Program for Parents and Youngsters) across 13 sites  Early childhood interventions has produced encouraging results,  often focus on parenting practices especially that children’s school  to improve the home learning readiness significantly improved  environment, access to services, after 12 months of the early  and sense of connectedness childhood enrichment program.  with the local community. Also, parenting and the home Early childhood and disadvantage environment have been shown HIPPY was rolled out as part of the  to have a strong and direct effect Labor government’s social inclusion  on school readiness, explaining agenda, and targets parents with  about one-half of the effect of four-year-old children living in  financial disadvantage on children’s areas of disadvantage. Financial  learning and cognitive ability disadvantage and social exclusion  (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan 2000). have been shown to adversely affect the early development of children Effective parenting programs so that they do not start school  A review of fifty years research on an equal footing with other  has shown several features of children from non-disadvantaged effective early years parenting backgrounds (Smart et al. 2008). programs. These are well The developmental gap is difficult reflected in the defining to close, particularly later in life, characteristics of HIPPY, which: and puts children at risk of ongoing • is a combined home-visiting exclusion and poorer outcomes at school and as adults (Brooks-Gunn  and centre-based program 2003). Interventions that start • targets the parent–child early have been shown to be the  relationship and the home most effective (Barlow, Parsons &  learning environment Figure 1 HIPPY children’s ‘Who Am I?’ scores compared with other Australian children Australian
sample
HIPPY
baselineAfter
one
year
of
HIPPY 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 4:0–4:6 4:7–4:9 4:10–5:0 5:1–5:3 5:4–6:0 Age
in
years:months

8     oNevbmre  0210 

• uses para-professionals from the local community trained and supported by a qualified education and care professional • uses structured materials with clear instructions. HIPPY and school readiness The percentage of HIPPY children For the most part, l w ea h r o n     w g e r r e e a   t a l s y s  i essed  a a s s e   d r   e b a e d t y to  improvements on ncre ween outcomes were baseline (38%) and one year later greatest for the (nearly 80%). Improvements children scoring in in the child’s reading, writing the worst quartile and numeracy skills were also on measures at the start of indicated by parent reports. the program. Most children started HIPPY with limited academic skills: on average, HIPPY children scored 5 points below the Australian norm on the ‘Who Am I?’ test. However, as Figure 1 shows, after being in the program for a year, HIPPY children narrowed the gap by 3 points. Social-emotional development We also found a small and statistically significant improvement in children’s social-emotional adjustment, measured by the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Although children on average started HIPPY with greater social-emotional difficulties (including hyperactivity, peer problems and conduct problems), than children in the general Australian population, the gap was narrowed after one year of HIPPY (see Figure 2). Importantly, the children with the highest level of social-emotional difficulties had the biggest improvement in their overall SDQ score. Parent–child relationship While at this mid-way point we found no statistically significant increase in parental warmth, we also found no increase in hostile parenting. Qualitative evidence from parent surveys indicated that for most HIPPY parents,

www.bsl.org.au