Sample Solution

eing able to understand what systems of ideas operate at a policy and organizational level assist us in understanding how and why government and service respond differently in relation to child protection at a particular time.
This essay will firstly provide a brief historical overview of the diverse ideological factors influencing child protection policy and practice in Australia and illustrate its evolution. Starting with the child “rescue movement” and philanthropic initiatives in the nineteen century to more current formal measures through government policy and legislation.
Secondly, it will focus on more recent government child protection policy responses and reforms, the Special Commission of Inquiry into Child Protection Services in NSW which specifically identified challenges and gaps in the NSW child protection system. And made specific reform recommendations to be made and applied across NSW child protection system through the rolled out of the NSW Keep Them Safe Action Plan.

Child protection policy ideology
We have seen diverse Government policy and practice responses to child welfare and protection problems resulting in significant changes to child protection practice over time. Ferguson (2004) states that the ideologies that underpin the context of child protection policy and practice have changed. In the mid ‘ 1800s, we saw in Australia the establishment of voluntary non – government child welfare sector with Christian churches running orphanages and care of children in institutional settings. According to Liddell (1993) this was the main response especially in NSW which experience an increase in numbers of abandoned and neglected children as a result of the gold rush period and the growing population . In the late 19th century, we saw the establishment of a Children’s Court, the development of child protection legislation and the rise of what is referred to as the “child rescue” movement (CFCA, 2015).
This movement underpinning ideology consisted of the belief that parents had a moral responsibility to care for their children that parents were expected to assume. The ideology behind this movement sadly was later responsible for the development of very detrimental intervention policies that have become known as the “Stolen Generations” removing Indigenous children from their families. This was an early example of policy taking a wrong course of action and an example of colonialism at work impacting on families, in this case, Indigenous children and families through legislation and policy.
By the 1950s, we began to see a different response from government assuming more responsibility and increasing its use of legislative power to enforce adequate standards of care. We saw the closing of many large institutions and the establishment of smaller residential facilities for children in need of care and protection (Tomison, 2001, p.48). The ideology behind this child protection reforms Harris (2003) explained that was driven by a more overarching business discourse to increase the effectiveness and efficiency in the provision of services .