Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
ItemNo Preview AvailableInterventions for women who use force in a family context: an Australian Practice FrameworkKertesz, M ; Humphreys, C ; Larance, LY ( 2021)This Practice Framework isdesigned as a brief guide for practitioners and program designers to the principles and intervention style deemed essential for working with this population. It is best read in the context of a program curriculum such as the Positive Shift Curriculum or the University of Melbourne research reports on this topic. The framework is based on a research program about women who use force in a family context, which has included academic researchers from the University of Melbourne and Curtin University and service providers and users (Baptcare and Berry Street).
ItemWomen who use force: Final Report. Volume 1 – Executive Summary, Positive Shift Program, Evaluation of Positive Shift, and Practice Framework.Kertesz, M ; Humphreys, C ; Ovenden, G ; Spiteri-Staines, A (University of Melbourne and Curtin University, 2020)This is the final report (3 volumes) of a research program that has developed the Australian knowledge base about women who use force in a family context, and appropriate service responses. The research was funded by the Department of Social Services. Volume 1 contains a practice framework for intervening with this population, a description and evaluation of +SHIFT (a group work and case management program for women who use force) and the executive summary.
ItemMore questions than answers: a focus on reunification for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in out-of-home care, in The Family Matters Report 2020Krakouer, J (SNAICC, 2020-11-16)The disproportionate rate of entry into out-of-home care (OOHC) is well documented for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and youth throughout Australia (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) 2020a; Lewis et al 2019). However, less is known about children and youth who exit out-of-home care by returning to the care of their parents or former carers. This special report reviews the literature, and the publicly available data for 2018-19, about reunification for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and non-Indigenous children in out-of-home care systems. It was found that in 2018-19, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were less likely to have case plans that included reunification as a possibility compared to non-Indigenous children, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were also less likely to be reunified with family compared to non-Indigenous children. Reunification rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children were highest in Victoria, however, entry to care rates were also highest in Victoria compared to other states and territories. Except for the Australian Capital Territory and South Australia, once reunified, there was no marked difference between rates of re-entry to care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children compared to non-Indigenous children. Examination of differences in reunification patterns across states and territories were also limited by the low numbers of children reunified in some states and territories (such as the Northern Territory), as well as absent data from New South Wales and Queensland. Ultimately, questions concerning reunification casework practices across the nation remain, while reunification data from 2018-19 has generated more questions than answers.