pdf [5.3MB] - Department of Families, Housing, Community Services

More documents

Recommendations

Info

support, advice, safety or opportunities may prevent the child from traversing a negativepathway.The family environment has been accredited to a higher probability of being involved incriminality, through involvement in delinquency during adolescence and the development ofcriminal careers later in life.A longitudinal study examined by Catalano et al (2007) looked at the direct and indirectrelationships between protective factors in the family environment during early and lateradolescence and self-reported crime in the first year post-high school. The study showedthat children who were more bonded to parents in early- and mid- adolescence and whosebonding to parents decreased less during early adolescence were less likely to reportcriminal behaviour in emerging adulthood. Level and change in family managementpractices in both early and later adolescence predicted criminal behaviour in emergingadulthood.Mediation models indicated that effects of early adolescent family environment on latercriminal behaviour were mediated by late adolescent family environment. In turn, effects oflate adolescent family environment were largely indirect, through level of criminal behaviourat the end of high school. In other words, children who exhibited criminal behaviour at theend of high school – which is affected by late adolescent family environment – were morelikely to continue with that criminal behaviour into early adulthood.A number of studies examined the linkages between family structure on the probability ofteenage promiscuity, substance use and crime. For example, Antecol and Bedard (2002)found that when paternal presence was measured as a continuous variable there arestatistically significant reductions in youth participation in smoking, drinking drugs, sexualintercourse and conviction before the age of 15 years, associated with the length of time thebiological father remains in the household. Antecol and Bedard (2002) noted that there wereexceptions to this, when the father remains in the house but has such a negative relationshipwith the mother and children that youth outcomes are worse. These findings add weight tothe notion that it is the quality of the relationship between the parents and child as well asbetween the parents that is of importance in determining childhood outcomes.Antecol and Bedard (2002) found that an additional five years with the biological fatherdecreases the probability of smoking by 5.3%, drinking by 1.2%, engaging in sexualintercourse by 3.4%, marijuana use by 2.2%, and conviction by 0.3%. However, youthoutcomes could also be worse if family stress due to tension and arguing is higher with thefather in the house.Fergusson and Horwood (2002) studied trajectories of criminology from a longitudinal studyconducted in New Zealand which followed 896 children from birth to the age of 21 years.The underlying theory was developed from Moffit (1993) and the identification of differenttypes of offenders. Fergusson and Harwood (2002) noted that in addition to the Moffit (1993)criminal career theory a number of other studies had suggested that:‘...early onset delinquency is largely shaped by a series of family processes,including inept parental discipline, poor parental monitoring and impaired familyproblem solving, that creates a socialisation process in which children learn thatcoercive and antisocial behaviours have an adaptive value. In contrast, thosewho show late (after 14) onset offending lack the marked family difficulties thatare present for the early onset group but are nonetheless exposed to greaterfamily difficulties than non-offenders. The moderate risk status of this group is22
exacerbated by the formation of affiliations with delinquent peers who may act toencourage, reward, and sustain tendencies to antisocial behaviours’.Fergusson and Horwood (2002) identified five distinct groups of offenders in their NewZealand study. The low-risk trajectory group had very low levels of conduct problems (less than 2%)during mid-childhood (8-10 years). Offending was scarce during adolescence butincreased slightly at 17 years, declining thereafter. This group had a low rate ofoffending with a reported 1.6 offences over the period from 14 to 20 years.The early onset trajectory group had relatively low rates of conduct problems duringmid-childhood (approximately 8%). The group displayed a moderate risk of offendingin early adolescence peaking around the age of 13 years and declining to a lower riskaround the age of 17 years onward. This group reported a mean of 4.8 offences overthe period from 14 to 20 years.The intermediate onset trajectory group, mostly did not display any conduct problems.This group had a similar offending profile to the early onset group, but started offendingduring mid-childhood. This group had a very clear peak of offending between the years14 to 17, with a peak risk of 91% occurring at the age of 17. This group had a muchgreater rate of offending overall with a mean of 48.8 offences reported between theages of 14 and 20.The late onset trajectory group had a relatively low rate of conduct problems (12%) andhad an offending profile with low risk prior to 17 years of age, that increased toapproximately 85% at 17 years and declined thereafter. This group had an offendingrate that was less than the intermediate but greater than the first two, with a mean rateof 24.1 offences.The chronic offender trajectory group had a majority of people with conduct disorder(58%). High rates of offending were observed between 11 to 17 years with a smalldecline at 20 years of age. This group had a dramatically higher offending rate, withmembers reporting an average of 141.1 offences between the age of 14 and 20 years(35.3 offences per annum).Overall, Fergusson and Horwood (2002) found that increasing criminal tendencies wereassociated with male gender, parental criminality, parental conflict, tendencies to noveltyseekingbehaviours, low intelligence and low self esteem. Figure 2-5 shows the associationsbetween sub-types of adolescent-limited offenders to FF risk factors. These increased withthe rate of offending, except for late onset offenders, who were more likely to be influencedby their peers and/or low self esteem.23
Page 1 and 2: June 2009Positive Family Functionin
Page 3 and 4: 3.8 Reconnect......................
Page 5 and 6: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSAccess Economics wo
Page 7 and 8: NESSNFFNPVPFFPIMTriple-PPUPRCTREACh
Page 9 and 10: A simple definition of PFF could no
Page 11 and 12: ehaviour during youth and later in
Page 13 and 14: Alternatives to such a partnership
Page 15 and 16: ooCommunities for childrenInvest an
Page 17 and 18: 1. MEANING AND MEASUREMENTWorking d
Page 19 and 20: Fletcher (2007) presented the New Z
Page 21 and 22: DomainEmotionalGovernanceEngagement
Page 23 and 24: ModelTABLE 1-2: THEORETICAL MODELS
Page 25 and 26: In times of crisis we can turn to e
Page 27 and 28: 2. MEASURING OUTCOMESImpacts from F
Page 29 and 30: TABLE 2-1: MATERNAL AND PATERNAL IN
Page 31 and 32: Parental limit setting, family conf
Page 33 and 34: studied in the literature and separ
Page 35 and 36: TABLE 2-7: FAMILY RISK FACTORS ASSO
Page 37: FIGURE 2-4: PARENTAL INPUTS (AGE TH
Page 41 and 42: Productivity outcomes appear to be
Page 43 and 44: Danish National Longitudinal Study
Page 45 and 46: Key research question 14: how the i
Page 47 and 48: ut could not (until further Waves o
Page 49 and 50: FIGURE 2-6: LONGITUDINAL PATHWAYS T
Page 51 and 52: only be useful in providing informa
Page 53 and 54: FIGURE 2-9: CONCEPTUAL MAP FOR VALU
Page 55 and 56: Productivity losses would best be m
Page 57 and 58: Short term productivity costsThe fr
Page 59 and 60: The expected retirement age by the
Page 61 and 62: (discussed previously in Section 2.
Page 63 and 64: Aids and home modificationsAlthough
Page 65 and 66: The extensive literature in this fi
Page 67 and 68: In discounting healthy life and oth
Page 69 and 70: proximal risk factors are those tha
Page 71 and 72: ages of 18-24 months and between 4
Page 73 and 74: TABLE 3-4: MATERNITY IMMUNISATION A
Page 75 and 76: Family Relationship Centres are a f
Page 77 and 78: Increased contentment in children w
Page 79 and 80: TABLE 3-7: FAMILY DISPUTE RESOLUTIO
Page 81 and 82: 3.3.1 COMMUNITIES FOR CHILDRENProgr
Page 83 and 84: Quantitative and qualitative data w
Page 85 and 86: This initiative developed out of a
Page 87 and 88: FIGURE 3-2: DIAGRAM OF TRIPLE P SYS
Page 89 and 90:
TABLE 3-11: RESULTS OF META-ANALYSE
Page 91 and 92:
This section on early childhood int
Page 93 and 94:
Table 3-14 displays a summary of th
Page 95 and 96:
TABLE 3-15: BCR OF ECE PROGRAMSSour
Page 97 and 98:
3.6 PEEL CHILD HEALTH SURVEYThe Pee
Page 99 and 100:
Research on efficacy - Evaluation o
Page 101 and 102:
Education participation levels rema
Page 103 and 104:
For FLW, outcomes assessment was re
Page 105 and 106:
whether children, families and comm
Page 107 and 108:
Mothers of 36 month olds were repor
Page 109 and 110:
The effects associated with SSLPs a
Page 111 and 112:
social context of the family.Self-r
Page 113 and 114:
social and emotional development of
Page 115 and 116:
analyses can be broken down further
Page 117 and 118:
4. CONCLUSIONThe method proposed fo
Page 119 and 120:
Australian Institute of Family Stud
Page 121 and 122:
Duncan J, Bowden C, Smith AB (2005)
Page 123 and 124:
Mathers C, Vos T, Stevenson C (1999
Page 125 and 126:
Sanders MR (2003) ‘Triple P - Pos
show all

pdf [5.3MB] - Department of Families, Housing, Community Services

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?