Data, stories, and change
Dr Kristy Noble
What matters in society? And how do we make sure that we are acting in alignment with the things we believe matter most?
You’d be hard pressed to find someone in Australia who wouldn’t agree that children are important, that they deserve to be nurtured and protected and to have a good life. So why are children, their lives, and the issues that affect them so missing from public discourse?
The data we collect, the stories we tell around that data, and the way we frame it and think about it are key to making sure we have the right conversations.
ARACY and UNICEF Australia have embarked on several joint ventures in our efforts to piece together the story of Australia’s children now and over time. Understanding the experiences of children and how they are changing provides opportunities to identify and drive forth efforts that enhance wellbeing, and identify areas needing additional attention.
Our most recent endeavour is the development of the Australian Children’s Wellbeing Index (Index)[i], modelled on the Canadian Index for Child and Youth Wellbeing developed by UNICEF Canada[ii]. Our Australian index attempts to capture the wellbeing of Australian children and young people at a national level, in a systematic manner, underpinned by a conceptual framework of wellbeing informed by children and young people themselves. Specifically, we have based our report on ARACY’s The Nest[iii], a framework for conceptualising wellbeing that delineates wellbeing into six interconnected domains:
1. To be valued, loved, and safe
2. To have material basics
3. To be healthy, both physically and mentally
4. To be learning
5. To be participating
6. To have a positive sense of culture and identity
Crucially, this framework for wellbeing was developed from information provided directly by children, young people, and their families, alongside input from a range of experts and supporting literature. Our Australian Children’s Wellbeing Index collates indicators of wellbeing within each of these six domains to describe the wellbeing of Australia’s children. For example, within the ‘Healthy’ domain, indicators around physical activity, diet, weight, immunisation rates, infant mortality, mental health, and others are incorporated to develop a picture of the health of Australian children, accompanied by an analysis of the data implications. We hope that this snapshot will help drive change to lift the wellbeing of all Australian children.
One noteworthy feature of the data is the deficits-orientation of the indicators, and how this tends to flow into a deficits-focused analysis. For example, indicators of health include infant mortality, low-birthweight infants, rates of psychological distress, rates of obesity, etc. I don’t have statistical expertise, and I’m certain reporting on these particular indicators has utility for example regarding comparability. Nonetheless, a strengths-based approach is one element of the widely recognised best-practice approach to wellbeing when working with children and young people[iv]. The importance of a strengths-based approach is recognised by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, for example AbSec noting that (in relation to Aboriginal children in the child protection system) “This deficit focus frames the conversation in terms of dysfunctional Aboriginal families and communities”[v]. Additionally, the way information is framed has a highly variable impact on audiences. For example, framing parenting behaviours from a ‘healthy child development’ narrative has been shown to elicit support for parenting initiatives, while framing the same concepts from an ‘effective parenting’ narrative in fact deters parents’ support for the same initiative[vi]. Deficits-orientated indicators make strengths-based analyses challenging. Research reports, which inform service providers, policy-makers, and other research, provide an opportunity to set the language and tone around wellbeing for young people. Australian children are largely doing well, and all have strengths and resources that can be harnessed. Recognising this in data and our language around research and policy is one step toward embracing a strengths-based approach to wellbeing for Australian children.
A second point of interest from the data is the inequity it describes. There are several population-wide trends that are concerning – namely, the increasing rates of mental health problems and obesity – but many of the indicators showed that most children are doing well.
Except those who aren’t. 5% seems to be approximately the rate of children experiencing the most extreme forms of deprivation. For example, about 5% of children do not have adequate access to food. About 5% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are in out of home care. About 5% of 15-year-olds have less than 4 educational possessions, and about 5% of children do not have access to internet at home. There are also ongoing inequities regarding outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. Health inequities are, by definition, avoidable differences in health outcomes. What this describes is a community of children that are largely doing well, with pockets of children who are being left behind. Addressing this inequity is an important step towards making Australia the best place to be a child.
No discussion of data is complete without consideration of the data gaps. One notable is the sparsity of indicators describing children’s feelings of participation and their positive sense of identity and culture. The importance of identity and culture for wellbeing has long been recognised by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, and is increasingly being recognised more widely as critical to health and wellbeing. For example, the Department of Health’s National Preventative Health Strategy[vii] makes several references to the “cultural determinants” of health. Additionally, having a say in issues that affect them is a child’s right, and is important to their wellbeing. Despite this, data describing these elements of wellbeing are sparse.
ARACY and UNICEF Australia’s Australian Children’s Wellbeing Index is an important description of how Australian children are faring now and over time. There are notable trends and inequities evident in the data, and some gaps particularly relating to participation and positive sense of culture and identity. We hope that this resource will be utilised to drive positive change to give every Australian child the opportunity to thrive.
Dr Kristy Noble is ARACY’s Policy and Projects Officer, leading submissions to legislation affecting the wellbeing of children and young people and securing funding for future ARACY endeavours. When not striving for equitable public policy, Kristy works as a medical doctor in the Emergency Department. Kristy’s experience in healthcare in a variety of national and international settings has fostered a strong appreciation of the impact of social and political context on health and wellbeing. Kristy’s passion for evidence-based public health initiatives, particularly those affecting disadvantaged or vulnerable communities, has culminated in her current enrolment in a dual Masters of Public Health/International Public Health at UNSW.
References
[i] Noble, K., Rehill, P., Solli, K., Dakin, P., Harris, D. Australian Children’s Wellbeing Index. A story about data, a story about change. ARACY & UNICEF Australia. Canada, ACT. Publication pending.
[ii] https://oneyouth.unicef.ca/en/child-and-youth-well-being-index
[iii] https://www.aracy.org.au/the-nest-in-action
[iv] https://www.aracy.org.au/the-nest-in-action/the-common-approach/the-common-approach
[v] https://absec.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/AbSec-CaseStudy-Report-FINAL-Digital.pdf
[vi] https://www.parentingrc.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Talking-about-the-Science-of-Parenting.pdf
[vii] https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/national-preventive-health-strategy-2021-2030
