Suchergebnisse

Trust, between regular buyers and sellers, is thought to underpin retail-level illicit drug markets, discouraging sellers from taking advantage of buyers. Although dealers report rewarding regular, trusted customers with assured purity, less is known about their customers' experience of trust. Interviews with 101 methamphetamine users in New South Wales, Australia, confirm that users establish ongoing relationships with dealers. Irrespective of their level of methamphetamine use, some users trust their main dealer to supply a fair deal, whereas others expect to be taken advantage of. The study identified factors other than trust that might regulate dealer behavior. Methamphetamine use ebbs and flows. Users source drugs from multiple dealers, substitute other drugs for methamphetamine, and some buy a range of drugs from the one dealer. Our findings emphasize the complexity of factors that influence decisions about purchasing illicit drugs and point to a more holistic view of what regulates dealer behavior.

This article compares the time taken to exit from unemployment to permanent work with the time taken to exit from unemployment to permanent work through casual work.

Collaborative governance involves processes and structures for policy development and decision making with particular relevance for health and social services. We examined collaborative governance in the reform of Western Australia's alcohol and other drug sector, applying Emerson et al.'s (2012) integrative framework. A documentary review and group interviews with government, sector, and consumer representatives were involved. Contextual factors included increased service funding, and the development of a partnership approach. Drivers for collaboration involved leadership and financial incentives for policy implementation. Key stakeholders across government and the sector reported a mutually supportive and constructive relationship and increased capacity, and they shared an agenda for change. The integrative framework was a useful structure for the explication of collaborative governance, although financial arrangements were not addressed.

Administrative data on foster carers in New South Wales (NSW) are sadly lacking. Based on research commissioned by the NSW Department of Community Services, this paper uses the Australian Bureau of Statistics Census of Population and Housing and other data to provide up-to-date information on the characteristics of foster carers and the demographic trends that are influencing their numbers. Census data indicate that foster carer families are most likely to contain women aged 35–54 years, not in the labour force. Couples account for two-thirds of all foster carers, with the majority of those couples also caring for birth children. While single parents account for less than one-fifth of all foster carers, they are more likely to foster than couples, either with or without birth children. Higher rates of fostering were found in relatively disadvantaged areas. Projected increases in female labour force participation are expected to contribute to a decline (or to slower growth) in the number of foster carers over the next decade. However, projected increases in sole parent families and couples without children are expected to have the opposite effect. The relative magnitude of these effects was not ascertained.

Acknowledgements; List of abbreviations; List of tables and figures; 1 The receiving end of welfare; 2 Poverty, deprivation, resilience; 3 Housing; 4 Social connections; 5 Working lives; 6 Barriers to and support for working; 7 Welfare as work: Dealing with Centrelink; 8 Values and ethics about income support; Afterword: In the no-standing zone; Appendix 1: The research project; Appendix 2: The characteristics of our participants; Notes; Bibliography; Index.

Hypothetical scenarios were used to assess the influence of the sensitivity of the study topic, payments, and study methods on research ethics committee (HREC) members' approval of social research studies involving children. A total of 183 Australian HREC members completed an online survey. The higher the perceived sensitivity of the study topic, the less likely the study would be approved by an HREC member. HREC members were most likely to approve each of the hypothetical studies if no payment was offered. Payment was the most common reason for not approving the low risk studies, while risks were the most common reasons for not approving the more sensitive studies. Face-to-face interviews conducted at home with children elicited substantially higher rates of approval from HREC members with more sensitive study topics. Both HRECs and researchers may benefit from additional guidance on managing risks and payments for children and young people in research.

As part of a larger study, Australian Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) members and managers were surveyed about their decision-making and views about social research studies with child participants. Responses of 229 HREC members and 42 HREC managers are reported. While most HREC members had received ethical training, HREC training and guidelines specific to research involving children were rare. Most applications involving children had to go through a full ethical review, but few adverse events were reported to HRECs regarding the conduct of the studies. Revisions to study proposals requested by HRECs were mostly related to consent processes and age-appropriate language. One-third of HREC members said that they would approve research on any topic. Most were also concerned that the methodology was appropriate, and the risks and benefits were clearly articulated. Specific training and guidance are needed to increase HREC members' confidence to judge ethical research with children.

The MESSI (Managing Ethical Studies on Sensitive Issues) study used hypothetical scenarios, presented via a brief online survey, to explore whether payment amounts influenced Australian children and young people to participate in social research of different sensitivity. They were more likely to participate in the lower sensitivity study than in the higher at all payment levels (A$200 prize draw, no payment, $30, or $100). Offering payments to children and young people increased the likelihood that they would agree to participate in the studies and, in general, the higher the payments, the higher the likelihood of their participating. No evidence of undue influence was detected: payments can be used to increase the participation of children and young people in research without concerns of undue influence on their behavior in the face of relatively risky research. When considering the level of payment, however, the overriding consideration should be the level of risk to the children and young people.