2014 susan armstrong is fdr facilitating children's right to enjoy their culture
TRANSCRIPT
Is FDR
facilitating children’s right to enjoy their culture?
Beth Dababneh &
Dr Susan Armstrong National Mediation Conference
Melbourne
11 September 2014
Acknowledging country
We pay respect to the Wurundjeri people
of the Kulin nation on whose beautiful land
we gather;
To their elders: past, present and future;
And to other Aboriginal people here today.
Context
• Cultural knowledge, language & connection with others who share culture are crucial to psychological, emotional & social development
• Child’s right to enjoy their culture with people who share it now part of best interests framework: s60C(2)(e), s60(3)
– FDR support this?
Research
• Does FDR facilitate child’s right to culture?
• Qualitative study
– 30 FDR practitioners
• Men & women, range of ages, professional & cultural backgrounds
• Mix of provider services, Legal Aid, community, private
– Open ended interviews, 2012
– Thematic analysis using NVIVO
Findings
Culture is important to children’s development
• emotional, social and psychological development
– Culture is central to identity formation
– Culture is socially transmitted
– Culture and language are inextricably linked
– When children lose cultural connections this can be harmful
Culture is Complex
• Challenging to identify and explain culture
• More aware of Indigenous children’s culture
– not often refer to children of minority cultural background, except in negative context
– culture highlighted by difference
• Culture and religion are difficult to distinguish
• Difficult to know all cultures
• Parent’s culture or child’s culture?
Culture has negative dimensions
• Culture not a universal good
– Sometimes associated culture with fundamentalism, lack of human rights, negative cultural (parenting) practices
– Parents sometimes used culture as a weapon against other parent
• Cultural (& religious) considerations sometimes meant more complex disputes: non-negotiable
• So FDRPS were committed to facilitating culture in FDR in principle,
– but tended to reify culture;
– were confused about its limits & implications;
– and felt poorly prepared to recognise and respond to culture.
FDRPs cautious about children’s cultural rights • Aware children had rights, & cultural right
– UNCRC & Family Law Act
• Unsure what right meant, especially in practice
• Unsure what their obligations were
• Children passive rights holders
– Difficult to conceive rights separate from parents
• Not all think culture should be a child’s right
Difficult to facilitate rights in best interest paradigm
• Rights seems to conflict with best interests, or it was not clear what the relationship is
• Culture not always promote best interests
• Right to enjoy culture translated to maintaining a meaningful relationship parents
• Safety more important than culture
• This would suggest FDRPs had an uneasy relationship with child’s right to enjoy culture
• May explain why they did not prioritise it in FDR, or that they found it difficult to facilitate
The FDR process didn’t facilitate children’s cultural rights • Intake/Assessment didn’t always provide
chance explore culture, or flag as an issue
• Difficult to identify ‘cultural’ issues or when it might be appropriate to discuss
• Child’s passive right to culture placed FDRP in role of advocate, or relying on parents to raise
• The time is so limited
Difficult to advocate children’s cultural rights in parent-centric process • Parents most effective people to facilitate child’s
rights, but often not capable if in dispute – Parent’s responsibility to introduce culture: right gave
parents authority to demand culture, use against
– By assisting parents to resolve dispute, FDRPs indirectly affording child’s rights to enjoy culture
• Could only guess what right to enjoy culture meant for each child – little opportunity children to be involved FDR, depended on maturity
Felt poorly equipped to facilitate children’s cultural rights • Not feel culturally competent
– Culture complex & different for everyone
– Reluctant to discuss culture with Aboriginal parents
– FDR with cultural issues often complex
• Ethical limitations: felt advocating children’s rights compromised impartiality/neutrality
• So committed in theory to facilitating children’s right to enjoy culture, but felt there were practical and ethical limitations of doing so
Implications
• FDR training to better incorporate culture
– Understanding of best interests/rights
• Ongoing professional development
– Conversations about culture
• Good practice guides
• Further research – small study
– Children from culturally diverse backgrounds
• Modify FDR model to prepare parents: CFDR?