ALCOHOL’S INVOLVEMENT IN CHILD PROTECTION CASES

Alcohol is commonly involved in child protection cases across all states and territories. The percentages of cases that involve alcohol (or AOD where alcohol-specific information is not available separately) in each of the states and territories are noted in Table 8.1. In terms of government reports, in substantiated child abuse and neglect cases investigated by CPS in Victoria between 2001 and 2005 (calendar years), approximately one-third involved some degree of problematic alcohol use by the child’s parents (Laslett et al. 2010). In QLD, 24 per cent of substantiated cases reported in 2007 involved parental alcohol misuse. Carer AOD problems were more commonly identified in substantiated neglect cases, and less commonly in sexual abuse, compared with other types of abuse (Queensland Government Department of Communities 2008). In NSW, only 15 per cent of cases were reported to involve carer alcohol abuse in reports from 2006-07. However, in more detailed study of a sample of 200 families, 35 per cent involved carer alcohol problems (Hopkins & Smoothy 2007).

Studies utilising smaller child protection samples and in different settings were also located. In WA 47 per cent of applications to the Children’s Court in 2000 involved alcohol (Farate 2001) and over three-quarters of the families of children entering alternative (out-of-home) care in SA were identified as involving parental misuse of alcohol (Jeffreys et al. 2009). In the NT, while there are limited statistical data, the media and literature around the role of alcohol in child abuse and the ‘rivers of grog’ is compelling and so severe that

a number of inquiries have been implemented into the abuse of children in the territory (see The little

children are sacred report (Wild & Anderson 2007) and the NT inquiry into child protection (Bamblett et al. 2010)). Both of these reports identify alcohol as an obvious problem, although there are only limited statistical data presented. No government or other reports from Tasmania regarding alcohol and child protection cases were identified.

Table 8.1 Current state/territory estimates of alcohol involvement in child protection cases

Australian Capital Territory Substantiated cases in 2000–2003: 56 per cent of cases in a study of 150 children from 110 families

involved alcohol and drugs (Murray 2004)

New South Wales

Substantiated cases in 2006–07: 15 per cent involved alcohol in the data system; 35 per cent involved carer alcohol in a sample of 200 cases (Hopkins & Smoothy 2007)

Court applications: 38 per cent of cases involve alcohol (McConnell et al. 2000)

Northern Territory Parental/caregiver substance misuse cited as a significant factor in child protection between 2003

and 2010 (Bamblett et al. 2010) but no data provided

Queensland

Substantiated cases in 2007: 47 per cent involved alcohol or drugs, 51 per cent of these cases involved alcohol only (i.e. 24 per cent of all cases). Parental/carer alcohol misuse was most commonly found in neglect cases (Queensland Government Department of Communities 2008)

South Australia Alternative care: approximately 70 per cent of cases in 2006 involved parental substance misuse

(Jeffreys et al. 2009)

Tasmania No estimates of the percentage of cases that involved alcohol and/or other drugs were identified

Victoria 33 per cent of all substantiated cases involved carer alcohol abuse and 42 per cent of cases

involving a court protective order (cases in 2001-2005) (Laslett 2013)

Western Australia 47 per cent of applications in 2000 to Children’s Court for care and protection orders involved carer

8.2.1 ALCOHOL RECORDING IN STATE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEMS ACROSS AUSTRALIA

Table 8.2 illustrates the variability in reporting of alcohol-related problems in CPS across Australia, highlighting the considerable disarray within Australian data sources, with alcohol and other drug misuse by carers in the child protection system inconsistently recorded.

Without continuing mandatory electronic collection of the involvement in cases of carer alcohol and other drug misuse in the various state systems, it is not possible to estimate whether alcohol is becoming an increasing problem within these systems. Where there is mandatory recording, there is usually only a combined flag for alcohol and drug misuse; separate recording would be an important addition to knowledge in the field; and given the substantial size of the problem it is an issue that requires close government monitoring. The mandatory recording of alcohol as a risk factor ceased in Victoria in 2005 (Laslett et al. 2010). The reinstatement of alcohol as a mandatory data field would enable the ongoing surveillance of alcohol’s effects upon the Victorian child protection system.

As highlighted in Table 8.2, surveillance in other states should also be enhanced. NSW only records alcohol involvement at the notification stage. Although QLD has an excellent electronic data collection system, it does not distinguish between alcohol and other drug misuse. Simple drop down boxes could be included for a number of risk factors in the different state-based CPS systems across Australia. A number of other changes to child protection data collection – for example the introduction of standardisation of alcohol misuse measures/definitions and the introduction of recording of referrals – are recommended. However, if standardised reporting of alcohol-related diagnoses is introduced, it is critical that child protection workers retain their ability to record the extent and nature of the impact of alcohol on parenting, regardless of the type of alcohol problem recorded. The ongoing reporting of alcohol involvement in CPS cases will enhance surveillance and evaluation of alcohol-related policies in this sector, as well as providing a basis for service systems and governments to plan and evaluate the impact of interventions to reduce rates of alcohol-related child abuse.

ALCOHOL’S INVOLVEMENT IN CHILD PROTECTION CASES 85