11.07.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

3. EFFICIENCY OF CURRENT AUSTRALIAN ANDINTERNATIONAL INTERVENTIONSPolicy interventions targeting FF have historically been difficult to measure and implement,primarily as a result <strong>of</strong> the large number <strong>of</strong> interacting and confounding factors involved inraising functional children from functional families (Carneiro and Heckman, 2003).Interventions targeting FF aim to reduce risk factors that are the product <strong>of</strong> a complex web <strong>of</strong>prenatal, social, cultural, demographic, family, neighbourhood, economic and political factors(AIHW, 2005).Interventions, whether they be through the provision <strong>of</strong> social services or long term socialmarketing campaigns, fall into one <strong>of</strong> three categories (Donovan et al, 2007) depending onwhere they are designed to take effect (Figure 3-1). Primary prevention is largely aimed atinfluencing public opinion and attitudes, with the aim <strong>of</strong> reducing the overall distal risk factorsfor NFF within society as a whole. Secondary prevention strategies are aimed at providingservices to those who are most at risk <strong>of</strong> NFF, focusing on proximal risk factors. Tertiaryprevention is aimed at reducing risks <strong>of</strong> recurrence where an adverse NFF outcome hasoccurred (such as child abuse or neglect).FIGURE 3-1: PREVENTION CONTINUUMSource: Donovan et al (2007).There are a number <strong>of</strong> points in the family life cycle where a FF intervention may beimplemented, from the pre-birth stage through to the child’s adolescent years, with someinterventions providing a specific focus on risky transition periods and others targeting overallfamily and society environment changes. For example, Carneiro and Heckman (2003)showed that interventions made early in the lifecycle provided the most optimal investmentsin terms <strong>of</strong> human capital outcomes (Figure 2-3).Interventions at the FF level can be thought <strong>of</strong> as targeting adverse outcomes (health,productivity or criminality) through generally distal risk factors as opposed to the morecommon proximal risk factors. This is in line with a recent shift in paradigm in theexamination <strong>of</strong> causal relationships <strong>of</strong> diseases, illnesses and injury towards the associateddistal risk factors. In brief:52

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!