I returned to the study cited this morning to see how that percentage compared to 1994-5. Information held in the CYF computer was compared to that held in the Social Welfare system. A 'match' indicated the subject of the care and protection order had a caregiver with a Social Welfare Number (SWN).
Table 1 Matched Cases Between SWIFT and SWis Systems
| 
Match/No
  Match | 
Number | 
Per cent | 
Number | 
Per cent | 
| 
Match,
  with SWN | 
236 | 
79 | 
256 | 
85 | 
| 
Match,
  but no SWN | 
10 | 
3 | 
7 | 
2 | 
| 
No
  Match | 
54 | 
18 | 
37 | 
12 | 
| 
TOTAL | 
300 | 
100 | 
300 | 
99* | 
So 82 percent of the Care and protection cases involved a caregiver (usually mother) who had a SWN.
However, "In a substantial minority of these matches, 107 cases (36%) in the care and protection sample and 80 cases (27%) in the youth justice sample, no current income-tested benefit was being paid nor was there a benefit paid over the 1994-95 period."
This would drop the percentage significantly.
So I'm still keen to know what the source is for the Professor's claim. Some questions I think.
UPDATE. I have been in touch with the Professor who has very quickly responded and provided a link to their study. Here is the exact wording: "Of all children having a finding of maltreatment by age 5, 83% are seen on a benefit before age 2, translating into a
very high “capture” rate."
To be fair, having a SWN does not mean you are currently on a benefit. I have a SWN and have not had any involvement with the benefit system since 1990.
ReplyDeleteYes, and I pointed that out below the table. I probably had one in the 90s too after a fortnight on the dole.
ReplyDeleteHow dare you go on the dole Lindsay.
ReplyDelete