It sounds like the loathing you describe isn’t something that’s going to be easy to fix, either.

Too right Human services are held in very low esteme here in Vic.
apart from PK’s point that they are the mob that takes kids away, they are also the mob that takes good kids and churnes out bad kids.

When i was in the community sector here in Melb, if the subject of my employment came up, discussion would follow, often lively esp if it strayed into the area of prohibition. after i joined the department, DHS, telling people what i did would result in silence, usually pained and/or embarressed silence. it appeared that almost everyone i met had some story about contact with the department, usually bad.

Also i have never worked in such a violent environment. in the course of my work in the community sector, i’ve been held in doorways with knives to my throat, attacked with hammers, stallked and abused in loud and monotonous language. But in the DHS it was a step up, even to the point of death threats. there are entire employee safty sections devoted to parking when you go on a home visit; park facing out of any culdesac, call in before leaving the car, arrange for someone to call in ten minutes etc. most of it is common sense, but some of it is insulting, esp the calls in the middle of a home visit. it is amazing just how upset people can get when they realise that you have just engaged in a protocol that implies that they may be dangerous.

now i hope that you don’t think that i am just able to bag DHS, they do a thankless task with minimal resourses, and are often faced with generational disadvantage and elaborate codes of silence that protect violent perpetrators of many stripes. again sorry it took so long to get back to you, i plead newborns.
ciao

My preferred option is for better coordination of records between DoCS, Justice, Education and Health. Problem is that cross-departmental dossiers are a nightmare wrt privacy, FOI and the rest. If you can’t access your records, that’s unjust, but if you can, you might not like what you find, and become uncooperative.

I do worry whether changing the threshold for abuse reporting is going to mean more children slipping through the net. It seems entirely plausible that the reluctance of professionals to report suspected child abuse hasn’t gone away, and handing more discretion back to them might lead to serious cases going unreported.

Robert re children “slipping through the net” the first question that has to be raised is why 3 times more children are taken into care in NSW than Victoria? Compulsory reading here:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23561867-5013946,00.html

“The statistical probability is now that one in every five children in NSW will be reported to DOCS … before they turn 18.”…

Substantiated cases of abuse and neglect fell between 1999-2000 and 2006-07, even as they rose six-fold in NSW….

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare’s annual report on child protection reveals that while the number of substantiated cases of abuse and neglect rose to 37,094 in NSW, it fell to 6828 in Victoria. And that was despite the fact that Victoria started off the eight-year period with more substantiated cases of abuse and neglect than NSW, Bromfield says. “They took what they called their killer statistics to Treasury and said we need to turn our system around now.”

Five years of consultations between the government and the non-government sector have resulted in what most regard as a model system.

The Victorian Department of Human Services deals with the forensic side of child protection.

Community organisations deliver the services at the local level, much as happened in days gone by. But the processes are more painstakingly structured now. Following referrals from maternal health nurses, teachers, mental health workers or doctors concerned about the children in a particular family, the nearest Child First team decides which support services are required or whether child protection officers should be involved.

In NSW, with ONE organisation only, mention the word DOCS and instant negativity. They’re the people who take the kids away.

The greatest villain in the picture in the whole sorry saga in NSW is not just the single structure of DOCS but the media’s moral panics generated when a child dies. The effect of NSW’s system, thanks in large part to the media’s moral panics, politicians lack of intestinal fortitude is effectively “better that 15000 kids be taken into care on minor risk than one child dies.” DOCS is under the gun. Children’s Court Magistrates are likewise under the gun and the subconscious influence of the media has (and I’m not blanketing all Magistrates as unfeeling uncaring judicial officers) MUST exert an influence on them to become the rubber stamps of DOCS. I’m not saying necessarily they are influenced, but that pressure is there. Parent’s legal representatives are under the gun in coping with the madness of the growing number of DOCs cases. Complex cases are like running a District Court trial for two weeks but without barristers, the NSW Legal Aid Commission cannot afford barristers in the Children’s Court.

Victoria has got it right. NSW is screwed. Hopefully change will come.

I have 5 DOCS care matters in my files, and that number is escalating. I cannot avoid DOCs cases even if I wanted to, given the dearth of lawyers in western NSW where I operate.

The legislation in NSW is fast becoming a human rights nightmare for parents. Once in care, DOCS has parental responsibility, even under interim orders. That’s administrative law and within the Administrative Decisions Tribunal arena, where in relation to access visits for example “arbitrary interference in the family” from Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights cuts no ice at all.

Don’t get me started on the admissability of hearsay evidence from non mandatory reporters who in many cases give trumped up reports simply out of spite, and whose identity cannot be disclosed by DOCS, whose evidence can NEVER be cross examined by the parents lawyers.

Sorry for breaking the 3 para rule Robert