Parental warmth and disciplineIn waves 1 and 3, primary carers <strong>of</strong> children in the older(K) cohort were asked questions about parental warmth,such as hugging their children for no particular reasonor praising them for doing something well. Primary carerscontinued to have warm relationships with their childrenbut with appropriate adjustments for age. There weresmall decreases in the frequency with which primarycarers hugged their children, which was most likely dueto increased independence <strong>of</strong> the children in solvinglife’s difficulties rather than the primary carers’ decreasingwillingness to hug them. Primary carers continued topraise their children when they did something well.In wave 3 primary carers were asked additional questionsabout whether they enjoyed listening to their child andhow <strong>of</strong>ten they felt close to the child when the child washappy or upset. Responses showed that 86.2 per cent <strong>of</strong>primary carers always or <strong>of</strong>ten enjoyed listening to theirchild, 96.9 per cent felt close to their child when the childwas happy and 95.4 per cent felt close to their child whenthe child was upset.The proportion <strong>of</strong> primary carers always making sure thattheir children did what was asked <strong>of</strong> them increasedfrom 39.7 per cent in wave 1 to 45.8 per cent in wave 3.The vast majority <strong>of</strong> primary carers always asked wheretheir children were going when they left the house(89.6 per cent) and always knew where they were whenthey were playing away from home and who they werewith (94.0 per cent).Major life eventsMajor life events have a significant impact not only onthe people involved but on those around them as well; interms <strong>of</strong> this study, events occurring to a family membermay affect other or even all family members, includingthe child. As discussed in the Key <strong>Summary</strong> <strong>Report</strong> fromwave 1, the more major life events a child experiencesin a single period (in this case, the previous 12 months),the greater the risk <strong>of</strong> clinically significant emotionalor behavioural difficulties. Zubrick et al., 2005 foundthat where fewer than three stressful events occurred,around 15 per cent <strong>of</strong> 4 to 11 year-olds were at high risk<strong>of</strong> emotional or behavioural difficulties. This increased to25 per cent for families who experienced between threeand six stressful events, while the percentage <strong>of</strong> childrenat risk <strong>of</strong> difficulties rose to 42 per cent in families whoexperienced seven or more stressful events.In all three waves <strong>of</strong> Footprints in Time, primary carerswere asked questions about events that might havecaused significant stress. These events might have broughtpositive or negative experiences but all had a potentialto cause significant impact on the family. Additionally, oneevent might affect each family member differently. Forexample, a mother might be excited about starting a newjob and bringing in extra income, but the accompanyingchange in the life <strong>of</strong> the family as a whole might be quiteunsettling for the child.Looking at the data across the three waves makes itpossible to gauge the potential effect <strong>of</strong> major life eventson the Footprints in Time children. The average number<strong>of</strong> events experienced in wave 1 was 4.06; in wave 2 itdecreased to 3.86; and it rose again to 4.13 in wave 3.Table 37 shows the percentage <strong>of</strong> the sample thatexperienced fewer than three, between three and six, orseven or more life events.The proportions <strong>of</strong> people experiencing zero to two, threeto six or seven or more events remained relatively constantacross the three waves. About one-third experienced zeroto two events, about half experienced three to six andabout one-sixth experienced seven or more (Table 37).Table 37: Number <strong>of</strong> major life events experienced atwaves 1–3, per centNumber <strong>of</strong> events Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 30 to 2 31.7 34.9 30.13 to 6 49.6 50.3 53.67 or more 18.6 14.8 16.4Number <strong>of</strong>respondents1,539 1,471 1,333These findings raise the question <strong>of</strong> whether it is thesame families falling into the same categories eachyear or whether families experience major life events atdifferent rates each year. It is possible to investigate this bylooking at the pattern <strong>of</strong> movement between the threecategories. Of the children for whom there was data forall three waves (n=1,241), 5.4 per cent fell into differentcategories each year. The largest number <strong>of</strong> children(16.8 per cent) lived in families who experienced threeto six events in all three years. The second largest groupwas those who experienced zero to two events in all years(8.8 per cent). Only 3.3 per cent experienced seven ormore major life events in all three years, meaning a total<strong>of</strong> 28.9 percent were in the same category in all threewaves. About one-third (32.1 per cent) experienced sevenor more events in at least one year.50 Footprints in Time: The Longitudinal Study <strong>of</strong> Indigenous Children | Key <strong>Summary</strong> <strong>Report</strong> from Wave 3
Table 38 shows the percentages <strong>of</strong> children whoexperienced these life events and the number <strong>of</strong> timesthey experienced them. Of the children whose parentsreported they had experienced seven or more life eventsin any <strong>of</strong> the waves, 10.3 per cent had experiencedseven or more in all three waves. Given the movementbetween the categories, it seems that, for most familiesexperiencing a high number <strong>of</strong> major life events in oneyear was not necessarily a predictor <strong>of</strong> this happening insubsequent years.Figure 24 shows how the prevalence <strong>of</strong> individual lifeevents has changed between waves 1 and 3. In wave 3,respondents were more likely to report that someone theyknew had passed away or been sick or hurt, although inmost cases these events happened to someone not livingin the house, so the child may only have been peripherallyaffected. The events most likely to have affected theprimary carer were pregnancy or having a baby and‘humbugging’ (being harassed for money). The Childrenwere directly affected by family arguments and scared byother people’s behaviour.Table 38: Number <strong>of</strong> life events by number <strong>of</strong> years experienced, per centYears experiencedNumber <strong>of</strong> life events1 2 3Number <strong>of</strong>respondents n=1,2410 to 2 47.3 37.9 14.8 7383 to 6 39.1 41.1 19.8 1,0547 or more 64.1 25.6 10.3 398Note:The total number <strong>of</strong> respondents is 1241 but some may be counted in more than one category.Figure 24: Prevalence <strong>of</strong> major life events for wave 1 and wave 3, per centFootprints in Time: The Longitudinal Study <strong>of</strong> Indigenous Children | Key <strong>Summary</strong> <strong>Report</strong> from Wave 351
![pdf [107kB] - Department of Families, Housing, Community Services](https://img.yumpu.com/51272499/1/190x245/pdf-107kb-department-of-families-housing-community-services.jpg?quality=85)
![Land Claim - pdf [278kB] - Department of Families, Housing ...](https://img.yumpu.com/47002639/1/184x260/land-claim-pdf-278kb-department-of-families-housing-.jpg?quality=85)
![Borroloola Land Claim - pdf [299kB] - Department of Families ...](https://img.yumpu.com/46103973/1/184x260/borroloola-land-claim-pdf-299kb-department-of-families-.jpg?quality=85)
Change language