Introduction:
There are numerous challenges that the families of Australia encounter. Since their household structure mainly comprises of couple, thepossible challenges that the families face are that of movement or shifting of the house, separation or divorce, as well as unemployment and financial problems. The association of the individuals with the environmental influence is a common cause for the development of the problematic issues. Some of the challenges that the families of Australia face include the management of chronic pain regarding the accommodation. The parenting issues and the internal family problems too create a challenge for the people who face certain disabilities or are suffering from physical illness. The parental ignorance and the sibling rivalry in Australian families have resulted in the death of a family member, drug, alcohol or gambling addiction. Another major problem is the coping up of the domestic violence and suicidal tendencies of the people. The employment and the financial instability of the families of the Australian people result in the in-disciplinary behaviour which further results in the various kinds of family problems.
Political , Cultural and Social diversity in Australia
Australia is a highly diverse country. It is rich in political , cultural as well as the social diversity. Australia is politically diverse , which implies that people belonging to different dimensions of race, gender, religious beliefs, political beliefs and ideologies reside together. The system fulfils the political interests of all the people, living in the nation. The government of Australia in the past entertained a politics which was pursued by people of different and diverse backgrounds. However in the recent years the Australian political atmosphere allows the people with a political and only the people belonging to a political background are allowed to join the political career.
Australia has a rich cultural diverse heritage. It can be described as a vibrant nation with diverse residents, their culture and lifestyle (Elias & Paradies , 2016).The primary three elements that are responsible for the creation of the demographics of Australia include the diversity of the aboriginal population, the colonialism and the treatment of the “other” by the British in the past and the immigration from the other different cultures of the world. According to the statistics, almost 46% of the population of Australia have at least a parent who is born overseas (Cultural Diversity in Australia, 2019). Additionally, almost 20% of the population of Australia speak in a different language other than English. Overall, it has been found that the Australians speak more than 200 languages apart from English. The most commonly spoken languages in the country are Greek, Italian, Chinese, and Arabic (Cultural Diversity in Australia, 2019). The nation’s predominant religion is that of Christianity. Approximately 61 percent of the population follows this religion. There are also other different religion that are professed in Australia. The other religions found in the country include Islam, Buddhism, Judaism and Hinduism with approximately 7,361 of the population practicing aboriginal traditional religions (Cultural Diversity in Australia, 2019). According to an open Census carried out in 2011, 61.1% of the population affirmed their affiliation to Christianity – with 30.1% being Protestants (Anglican 17.1%, Lutheran 1.2%, Uniting Church 5.0%, Presbyterian and Reformed 2.8%, Baptist 1.6%. Pentecostal 1.1%, 1.3% other Protestants, 25.3% being Catholic (Roman Catholic 25.1%, other Catholic 0.2%) while the remaining 2.9% consists of other Christians (aifs.gov.au , 2019).
Social diversity that Australia is rich in, involves individuals of different race, ethnicity and socio-economic status. The people who have different cultural and social background, and a variety of experience and interest for benefit, form a diverse community. These people speak different languages and belong to different geographical origins. With diverse population, Australia has citizens from more than 160 nations having variety of lingua franca (aifs.gov.au , 2019). Australia who previously had only Aboriginal people residing, now has only 2 percent of them. At present Australia is becoming an Eurasian nation, with 12 percent of its citizens from different parts of the world, primarily Asia (aifs.gov.au , 2019). People from overseas are travelling to Australia to settle down, but he ancestry and the traditionality of the nation is still kept intact. Finally if the social diversity of Australia is talked of, it can be verified with the generations that reside in this land still today. Australia has six of the 12 generations of the people living since 1788. Thus this proves that the people have a greater life expectancy in Australia.
Impact of these issues on social work practices and social policy
Multiculturalism or the cultural diversity of Australia is itself a contested policy which dates back to the early 1970s. However, since the diversity of the nation has increased in the recent years, the policy statements too have undergone changes and evolved in response to the governmental priorities and the demands of the Australian society. Australian public and social policies have been significantly impacted upon by issues that have taken birth from the cultural diversity and the international collaboration. According to Baker & Rowe (2014), the diversity in the political , social and cultural scenario and the challenges that this multiculturalism faces have laid an impact over the social work practises. It has enabled the right to cultural identity so that the people can express their own cultural heritage and has ensured the social justice and removal of barriers of race, ethnicity and culture. The social workers of Australia need to have a proper understanding and comprehension of their practices and how they are supposed to deliver their services, even if they are affected by the personal or structural issues arising from the cultural and ethnic differences (Baldwin, 2016) .
According to Gray & Webb, (2013), the social workers have a responsibility in the promotion of the social justice. They have a positive responsibility towards the people for whom they work. This involves challenging the negative discrimination, which is a direct impact of the cultural and the political issues. They often are not able to recognize and respect the cultural and ethnic diversity of the societies, taking into consideration the individual, the gamily as well as the community differences. According to Lonne et.al (2009), cultural difference is the area which has experienced the weakening of the child protection policy and its practice and frequently failed the children and their policies. He has also discussed how the is has affected the indigenous people. The multiculturalism and the different ethnic backgrounds of the individuals have made the social policies and the social work policies recognize it needs to respond effectively to the people, with different cultures, religions or social classes. It has made sure that the policies should recognize the values of the individual families of Australia and protect the rights and the dignity of each one of the community. The problems and the issues of the culture and ethnicity has allowed the social workers of Australia to appreciate and take into consideration the lived experience of individuals in the groups and the families. This has made the social workers to intervene and work for the protection of the children and the families from the ethnic and the cultural groups (Dufty- Jones & Rogers, 2015).
The growth in the cultural diversity has resulted in the reduction of the Aboriginal people and this is where the social policies have started to work for, they tend to protect their rights and make sure that the aboriginal children receive the equal educational opportunities like the non-aboriginals.
Theoretical and ethical framework that assist the social workers
Risk tolerance is a term that must be implemented when addressing ethical dilemmas in practice. Risk tolerance can be characterized as a level of risk comfort. It involves the risk of a goal or intent for one person and for another person. Experts may argue for and against risk; from no risk at all to a high degree of risk. This spectrum may be followed by risk tolerance that is part of the wider ethical framework (Flamberg et al., 2015).
The five components of ethical standards
Utilitarian: The philosophy seeks to achieve the best with the least harm to the involved. This approach is all about equilibrium. It discusses the implications, and clinicians using this strategy attempt to find for most people the best ethical approach.
Rights: People who decide to take a “rights approach” seek to defend and respect the rights and values of anyone whose ethical choices may be affected.
Fairness: The idea that everyone should be treated equally regardless of their position or power in a organization is mentioned in this article.
Common good: Workers should aim to protect their well-being. This ethical standard addresses other relationships and how empathy for one’s fellow man can motivate others to do better.
Virtue: The approach to virtue requires workers to draw upon fundamental values like integrity, bravery, kindness, empathy and more (Bell, Dyck & Neubert, 2017).
PLUS ethical decision making model
One of the most used and widely quoted ethical models is PLUS Ethical decision making model. The model is described as a way of giving the leader “moral filters” a decision to establish a clear and coherent approach to the solution in a ethical problem. Each letter shows a filter. They are political, legal, universal and autonomous respectively.These filters may also be used throughout the system, so that participants have a consistent ethical structure in the process (Zsolnai, 2017). The problem should be defined immediately by representatives to see if any of the PLUS ethical filters are violated. It should also be used to determine the feasibility of the decisions evaluated and decide whether the one selected has overcome the PLUS criteria in the first stage. With no model being perfect, it is a standard way of evaluating four key components that have a major ethical effect (Zsolnai, 2017).
Character based decision making model
Although this is not as commonly referred to as the PLUS model, it is worth mentioning. The Josephson Ethics Institute has developed a character-based decision-making framework that can be used by three main players when taking an ethical decision.
- Decisions should take the effect on all stakeholders into consideration– It is very much like the utilitarian approach previously discussed. It move is intended to do most good, and I believe it will minimize harm (Schwartz, 2016).
- A decision should not be rationally made if it contradicts ethical principles in no way. may take a precedence over some non-ethical values. In business, the decision can be taken to increase productivity or benefit and to keep the best interest of an individual at heart(Schwartz, 2016).
- One ethical principle is fine if it improves for others in a good ethical environment– leaders may find themselves in the unenviable position that ethical decisions are prioritized. They may be forced to choose between conflicting ethical choices, and it is proposed that leaders will always want the one that provides the best possible alternative for as many people(Schwartz, 2016).
Impact on the aboriginal families
As discussed by Altman (2018), the families and the cultural diversity of Australia has ensured a continuous impact over the aboriginal people of Australia. The indigenousgroup are udder serious impact due to the settlement patterns of the Australian people. Though there has been changes in the policies to address the problems, there had been the influence of the past and the history over these aboriginal tribes. The forced resettlements, the placing of the children in different institutions as well as the loss of the culture and the land are still experienced by the people of the aboriginal tribes. They have still continued to come together and settle in the pastoral stations (Gray & Tesfaghiorghis, 2018). However the influence of the western culture has indeed affected the indigenous groups. The increased availability of the western technological and educational opportunity have added pressures on these groups. Alcohol has also been responsible to produce devastating effects on these people. It is important for the Australian government to understand the essential features of the aboriginal people and the aboriginal culture so that the commitment to the family and the community is maintained. The special connection to the land would help the diverse cultural people to walk together as friends and equals. The past dislocation has impact on the current poverty as well as over the diverse aboriginal populations. The statistics that are used to demonstrate the disadvantage might also be reflective of the cultural differences and a preference of the aboriginal groups to retain their cultural diversity. Aboriginal unemployment is almost three times the rate of unemployment for non-Aborigines. Some 23474 Aborigines were unemployed as at September 1985 (Martin & Taylor, 2018). Twenty-five per cent of all unemployed Aborigines were under 20 (Martin & Taylor, 2018). The aboriginal values, their beliefs, their identities as well as their diverse language are nurtured within the families and this is what keeps the family strong.
There have been policies that need to be implemented to eradicate the family problems that are deeply entrenched in Australia and those which need to be approached with the consideration of different factors. However the problem arises since the Australian Indigenous culture is heterogeneous. The indigenous families and the aboriginal people of Australia do face a number of challenges. The marginalisation, the historical ongoing dispossession, racism and different other problems of the policies result in the compromise of the strength and the resilience of the aboriginal tribes. The policies of the forced removal of the culture result in the high level of unemployment, and financial instability. It also results in incidents of violence, and substance abuse among the indigenous people. The indigenous children also are negatively influenced. As stated by Lohoar , Butera & Kennedy (2014), these children have poor health and they are educationally and socially deprived than that of the non-aboriginal people. The indigenous people are also negatively impacted since they are inhibited of the proper delivery of services. The lack of proper infrastructure results in the hindrances of the logistics of the delivery of service. The people also face demanding workloads as well as low remuneration. This leads to difficult social environment among the aboriginal people, resulting in higher levels of anxiety, disorganisation and disempowerment.
Conclusion
Thus from the above discussion it can be concluded that the political social and the cultural diversity of Australia is under evolution and is growing rapidly thus affecting the aboriginal people. The multiculturalism has taken a toll on the migration of the aboriginal people. The families in the Australian nation thus face a number of challenges which include the unemployment and the financial instability. It also involves the growing issue of accommodation as well as the parental pressure. There has been significant impacts upon the social policies and the social work practices as well as they try to safeguard and preserve the dignity of the culturally different people and the diverse ethnic groups. The aboriginal people on the other hand too face issues since they are forced to live in a difficult social environment which presents them higher levels of anxiety, disorganisation and disempowerment. The children of these families too do not receive the same treatment as that of the non-aboriginals.
References:
aifs.gov.au. (2019). Challenges in the family. Retrieved 11 October 2019, from https://aifs.gov.au/publications/family-matters/issue-96/challenges-family
Altman, J. (2018). Beyond closing the gap: Valuing diversity in Indigenous Australia. Canberra, ACT: Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research (CAEPR), The Australian National University.
Baker, S. A., & Rowe, D. (2014). Mediating mega events and manufacturing multiculturalism: The cultural politics of the world game in Australia. Journal of Sociology, 50(3), 299-314.
Baldwin, M. (2016). Social work, critical reflection and the learning organization. Routledge.
Bell, G. G., Dyck, B., & Neubert, M. J. (2017). Ethical Leadership, Virtue Theory, And Generic Strategies. Radical Thoughts on Ethical Leadership, 113.
Dufty-Jones, R., & Rogers, D. (Eds.). (2015). Housing in 21st-century Australia: people, practices and policies. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd..
Elias, A., & Paradies, Y. (2016). The regional impact of cultural diversity on wages: evidence from Australia. IZA Journal of Migration, 5(1), 12.
Flamberg, S., Rose, S., Kurth, B., & Sallaberry, C. (2016). Paper Study on Risk Tolerance (No. Report No. 16-092).
Gray, A., & Tesfaghiorghis, H. (2018). Social indicators of the Aboriginal population of Australia.
Gray, M., & Webb, S. A. (2013). The new politics of social work. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Lohoar, S., Butera, N., & Kennedy, E. (2014). Strengths of Australian Aboriginal cultural practices in family life and child rearing. Melbourne, VIC, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Lonne, B., Parton, N., Thomson, J., & Harries, M. (2008). Reforming child protection. Routledge.
Martin, D. F., & Taylor, J. (2018). Enumerating the Aboriginal population of remote Australia: methodological and conceptual issues.
Schwartz, M. S. (2016). Ethical decision-making theory: An integrated approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(4), 755-776.
Cultural Diversity in Australia. Retrieved 11 October 2019, from https://www.culturaldiversity.net.au/
Zsolnai, L. (2017). Responsible decision making. Routledge.
