“Hands on”, “know the customer”, “stick to the knitting” – these are the key attributes of excellent organization; so is the message of a recent best selling text in management practice. Successful organizations specialize we are told. They do not produce “manufactures”, rather they produce particular manufactured products; hamburgers or microcomputers. When we turn to the human services, however, we note an increasing tendency to view tham as services, suigeneris, evoking a sense that we have pinned down a slice of reality about which we can think generically for purposes of policy and service provision. This view can be maintained only be asserting that there are no important differences in people's situations, by the use of bulk terms such as “children”, and “families” and by the simultaneous assertion that the important policy issues are organizational and managerial. T hat there are concepts that cut across categories is a reminder that there are, indeed, similarities between human beings and that we share a common culture but it is the real differences between target populations which provide anchorage for differential policies, programs and practice, rather than the similarities alone.

This article is an overview of community based respite care programmes operating in the metropolitan area of Sydney. The term “community-based respite care” in this article refers to a model where the care is given by other families within the community. The term “families” encompasses traditional two parent families, single parents and other caring adults. These families are identified as “host families” and “respite care” is defined as provision of short term relief from 2 hours to 2 weeks to disabled persons and their families on a planned basis or in emergency situations.

The underlying philosophy of community respite care is that services to the disabled should be based on making available to them the same patterns and conditions of everyday life which most citizens enjoy.

Many areas of the law with which social workers are required to deal are particularly dynamic and, in order to meet the challenges they present, it is necessary to look ahead. Developments in the United States often provide a useful means of predicting developments in Australia. The paper examines three areas, proceedings, social security law, and mental health – where change is becoming, or likely to become, apparent, in the first topic, there has been a marked change in both the issues with which the courts have had to deal and the methodology which they have adopted to attempt to resolve them. In social security law, decisions of the Administrative Tribunal have illustrated anomalies and deficiencies in the legislation, and social workers in their daily practice may notice others. All of that might well lead to a necessary review of the legislation. In the area of mental health legislation, a draft bill in Victoria contains a number of disquieting features which should cause social workers, as well as lawyers, concern. The paper concludes by noting that the legal relationship between social workers and the law has never been more subject to scrutiny in a wide variety of situations, and mutual respect between the two disciplines must continue to increase.

This paper deals with the Danish Child Welfare Law, which was passed in 1974 as part of an integrated welfare law aiming at decentralization of decision making in local government, and maximum citizen participation.

The law provides for counselling, recommendations and injunctions in connection with counselling, appointment of personal guidance officers, and taking children into care. The greater part of decision making is made in co-operation with parents. The few cases of removal of a child from the home without parental consent are conducted under the auspices of the local council welfare committee, presided over by a judge. Parents are given access and must be heard. Parents have wide rights of appeal.

This paper is an edited version of an address given at a seminar on ‘Future Directions in Child Welfare’ held at Monash University in May 1985. The seminar's aim was to facilitate discussion of the Victorian Child Welfare Legislation and Practice Review Report (The Carney Report).

The great challenge in the mid 1980's is to find ways to insulate children from the lingering political and economic malaise which has overtaken many families in Australia.

Family poverty, as many of you will know, has overtaken the poverty of the aged with which Australian society and welfare organisations were so familiar until the 1970's.

Nevertheless it came as a shock to me to see in black and white from the Social Security Department the figures which showed that the number of children living in poor families had quadrupled between 1973 and 1983 to the point where nearly one in five children in Australia is being raised in poverty.

This paper addresses itself to the topic of the single adoptive parent, a relatively new phenomenon in the adoptive process in Australia. It presents a review of the available research and a critical discussion of some of the pertinent issues raised by a consideration of this area. Brief comment is made about the current Australian scene and it is concluded that with caution, placement of children with single adoptive parents could be made on a routine basis.

Participation is about young people:

As the young person moves up the age scale from 12 to 25 it is a reasonable expectation that his or her grip will be tightening on the full range of adult rights and responsibilities. The young person will also be letting go special rights and responsibilities pertaining to childhood. Hopefully this new independence and these new obligations will be welcomed and successful completion of the developmental tasks of childhood and adolescence will leave, more often than not, positive feelings toward self and life in general.

The idea that children whose parents are unable or unwilling to care for them within the familial home should be cared for by the state or voluntary organisation, in small groups by adults who share their lives with the children, has gained considerable currency in the last two decades. (Ainsworth and Fulcher, 1981). However, although now widely accepted in principle, a uniform implementation of group care for children has been slow due to a number of factors.

The recent soccer tradegy at Brussels has no doubt many explanations, but one thing is certain. The offending Liverpool football supporters largely consisted of youths who had been greatly deprived in their childhood. Anyone who has been to Liverpool will be aware of the miserable living conditions that many families find themselves in. It is hardly surprising that children from this upbringing turned into hooligans who so disgraced their country.

Children are the citizens of the future. The future of Australia too depends on the children of today. It is therefore urgent that we protect the interests of children, who, of course, do not have a voice of their own.

This Bureau is one of the few organizations in Australia concerned to see that legislation is passed which is truly in the best interests of children. There are many areas which give rise to great concern.

PEACE is both an International and local issue which….

…. should also confront basic problems in society like inequality, unemployment, homelessness and racial discrimination .…requires society to be tolerant and flexible so people can be at peace with one another. (IYY 85 Brochure) PEACE .… the Pocket Oxford Dictionary refers to peace as being freedom from or cessation of war; civil order as secured by law; quiet, calm, harmonious relations. To be at peace is to be untroubled. For the present generation of young people issues relating to peace are of critical importance. International brinkmanship and possession of arsenals with unprecedented destructive power underscore age old questions of human relations concerning aggression and the management of competition and conflict. The daily news almost inevitably dreaws attention to conflict between individuals, between large groups of people and between nations. The slogan “Peace in our time” carries a note of urgency yet the daily experience of human conflict both real and simulated on TV screens points to the possibility that potential for conflict is deeply rooted in human nature.