41 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

Social exclusion is a risk factor for mental health

problems. This study aims to identify the factors that

contribute to social exclusion for children from several

cultural backgrounds, living in low-socioeconomic status

(SES) areas. Children from English, Chinese and Arabic

speaking backgrounds participated in semi-structured

interviews. They were asked questions around three

prominent themes of social exclusion: exclusion from

school, social activities and social networks. Children

from English and Chinese speaking backgrounds experi-

enced exclusion at school, from social activities or in

social networks. The major barriers to social inclusion,

which differed across cultural groups, included bullying,

time constraints, economic resources and parental per-

mission. Although money is a barrier to social inclusion,

there are several other barriers that need to be considered,

such as bullying, time and parental permission, and they

may differ by culture. Mental health promotion programmes

in schools and communities need to address these

barriers in a culturally appropriate manner.

A Cross-Cultural

Examination of Barriers

to Social Inclusion for

Children: A Qualitative

Study Using Child-

Centred Methods

Elise Davis1 , Belinda Davies2, Kay Cook2,Elizabeth Waters1, Lisa Gibbs1 and Naomi Priest1

1 McCaughey Centre, VicHealth Centre for the Promotionof Mental Health and Community Wellbeing, School of

Population Health, University of Melbourne

2 School of Health and Social Development, DeakinUniversity, Australia

Keywords: social exclusion; social inclusion; mentalhealth and culture

Introduction

There has been increasing international recognition of thegrowing impact of mental health problems (World HealthOrganisation, 2001). One in seven Australian children agedbetween four and seventeen years reports serious emotionaland behavioural problems (Sawyer et al, 2000), increasingto one in five children for children living in low-income

families or single parent households (Sawyer et al, 2000).Social inclusion is a key determinant of mental health(National Crime Prevention, 1999; CommonwealthDepartment of Health and Aged Care, 2000; Davis et al,2000; Rychetnik & Todd, 2004; Herrman et al, 2005;Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, 2005). Socialinclusion, although variously defined, refers to a person’ssocial networks, their social ties, their participation andconnectedness in community life and their access tobasic human entitlements (Victorian Health PromotionFoundation, 2005).

AA BB SS TT RR AA CC TT

42 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

Social exclusion is defined as:

a short-hand term for what can happen whenpeople or areas suffer from a combination of linkedproblems such as unemployment, poor skills, lowincomes, poor housing, high crime environment,bad health and family breakdown (Office of theDeputy Prime Minister, 2004 p10).

An individual is said to be experiencing social exclusion if:

he or she does not participate to a reasonabledegree over time in certain activities of his/hersociety and a) this is for reasons beyond his or hercontrol and b) he or she would like to participate(Burchardt, 2000 p388).

Although much of the literature on social inclusion/exclusion focuses on identifying the characteristics andconditions of those who have been excluded (Walker,1995; Fincher & Saunders, 2001; Whiteford, 2001), thereis a need to identify the individuals, institutions andstructures that are responsible for acts of exclusion (Fincher& Saunders, 2001).

The experience of social inclusion/exclusionfor children

Until recently, discussions of social inclusion/exclusionhave taken an adult-centred approach (Phipps & Curtis,2001), but the way in which children experience socialinclusion/exclusion may be different from the way inwhich adults experience it (Ridge, 2002). For children,social inclusion is defined as the:

social process through which the skills, talents andcapacities of children are developed and enhancedso that all children are given the opportunity torealise their full potential, and to fully participate inthe social and economic mainstream (Donnelly &Coakley, 2002 p2).

There is a growing consensus that social inclusion for childrenincludes participation in social activities, social networksand school activities (Phipps & Curtis, 2001; Ridge, 2002;Adelman & Middleton, 2003). For example, the Povertyand Social Exclusion Survey of Britain, a national surveyconducted in 1999, examined children’s participation andactivities (for example, hobby or leisure activities, schooltrips and access to leisure equipment) and social networks

(for example, having friends around once a fortnight for ameal) (Gordon et al, 2000).

Children at risk of social exclusion

Social exclusion, like poverty, cannot be attributed to anysingle cause (Kamerman & Kahn, 2002), but children livingin low socioeconomic areas are at risk of experiencingsocial exclusion, as they often experience an enforced lackof socially perceived necessities (Bynner & Londra, 2004;Mack & Lansley, 1985). UK research has demonstratedthat children living in poverty are 24 times as likely to lacka hobby or leisure activity as children who are not living inpoverty (Adelman et al, 2003), supporting similar findingsin the USA (Phipps & Curtis, 2001). Australian researchhas revealed that children from low-income families aresignificantly less likely to see their friends outside school(51% of low SES, 77% of medium SES and 91% of highSES) than children from middle and high income families(Taylor & Fraser, 2003).

Social inclusion/exclusion and child-centred

methods

It has recently been advocated that research on socialinclusion/exclusion in children should involve childrenthemselves (Ridge, 2002). Child-centred methods put thechild at the centre of the research, recognising that childrenhave their own set of opinions and judgements, which havethe same moral legitimacy as those of adults (Fine &Sandstrom, 1988). Child-centred methods recognise thatchildren are best informed about their own lives, and aretherefore best placed to report on the issues that aremeaningful to them (Ridge, 2002; Adelman et al, 2003). Arecent review by Attree (2006) examined qualitative studieswhich have used child-centred methods to examine theexperiences of children living in poverty. One UK studyincluded in this review involved in-depth interviews withchildren and young people aged between 10 and 17 whowere living in families in receipt of income support (n = 40)(Ridge, 2002). Ridge demonstrated that children reporteddifficulties in making and sustaining friendships, andexperienced disadvantage at school. A particular area ofdisadvantage at school was participation in school trips.Some children did not take letters home asking for moneyfor trips because they knew that their parents would not beable to afford them, demonstrating that children were self-excluding. This example highlights the importance ofinterviewing children directly, given that parents may notbe aware of all their children’s experiences or perceptions.

43 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

Social exclusion: the relationship with cultural

background

Very little is known about how the experience of socialexclusion for children varies by cultural group (Milbourne,2002; Backett-Milburn et al, 2003), or whether there areprotective factors against the experience of social exclusionthat vary by culture. In order to develop culturally appropriatesocial inclusion promotion programmes, it is important tounderstand the experiences of children with diverse culturalbackgrounds.

This study aims to identify the factors that contribute tosocial exclusion for Australian school-aged children fromthree cultural backgrounds, using child-centred methods.The study will be the first study in the world that hassought to examine differences and similarities in factorspreventing children of diverse cultural backgrounds frombeing socially included, using child-centred methods.

Method

This is an exploratory descriptive study (Marshall &Rossman, 1989) of the barriers preventing children frombeing included in social activities, social networks andschool activities. Relevant ethics approval was obtained.Children aged from nine to twelve were recruited to par-ticipate in qualitative semi-structured interviews. Childrenwere purposively sampled from low-SES areas and threecultural backgrounds. Cultural background wasdetermined by country of birth and the language spokenat home by the child’s primary caregiver: English,Chinese or Arabic. Children whose parents were born inAustralia and spoke English at home constituted theAustralian English-speaking background group. Childrenwhose parents had immigrated to Australia and spokeChinese (Mandarin or Cantonese) constituted the Chinese-speaking background group. Children whose parents hadimmigrated to Australia and spoke Arabic constituted theArabic-speaking background group. Children fromChinese and Arabic backgrounds were selected to representthe two largest non-English-speaking background culturalgroups that have recently immigrated to Australia(Department of Immigration and Multicultural andIndigenous Affairs, 2004).

Using data on the local government areas for Victoriain which immigrants have settled (Department of Immigrationand Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, 2004) and theSocio-economic Indicators for Areas (SEIFA) (AustralianBureau of Statistics – ABS – 2001), local governmentareas were identified that were:

of low socioeconomic status and had high proportions of immigrant families.

Families were then recruited from three local governmentareas through three local primary schools which agreed toassist with the study, and one cultural association group.

The school principals assisted with recruitment offamilies, either by sending plain-language statements hometo families or approaching families at pick-up times. TheAustralian-born English-speaking background childrenwere recruited through one school. The Principal sent lettershome to parents of all of the Australian-born English-speaking background children aged nine to twelve in theschool. Families who agreed to participate in the studycontacted the Principal, who then informed the researchers.

All the children from Chinese-speaking backgroundswere recruited from another school, with the assistance ofa school-based interpreter. The interpreter identified eightChinese-speaking background families in the school popu-lation, and distributed translated plain-language statementsand consent forms to these families. All the familiesapproached agreed to be involved, and were then telephonedby the researcher and an interpreter, using a three-way tele-phone call.

Children from Arabic-speaking background familieswere recruited from a cultural association group in thelocal community (n = 5) and a primary school (n = 2). TheSchool Principal identified children from Arabic-speakingbackgrounds and sent translated plain-language statementshome. Families who agreed to take part contacted thePrincipal, who then informed the researchers. A familyservices worker from an Arabic cultural association in thelocal community also invited families to participate in thestudy by distributing translated plain-language statements.

Interviews were undertaken by three white Anglo-Saxon female researchers with backgrounds in psychology,occupational therapy and health promotion. Before startingto collect data, the researchers interviewing children withChinese or Arabic speaking backgrounds participated incultural sensitivity training with highly experienced inter-preters. Researchers showed the interview guide to bothChinese and Arabic speaking interpreters, and discussedany potential problems that might arise during the inter-views. The interpreters provided information about culturalpractices relevant to working with families from Arabicand Chinese speaking backgrounds, such as awareness ofcultural practices that varied by gender (for example handshaking).

The study initially aimed to sample approximatelyeight children in each cultural group (providing n = 24),

44 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

anticipating that this number would yield adequate data fora rich in-depth analysis. The desired sample size wasachieved, providing a sample size of 25 children, includingnine children with an Australian English-speaking back-ground, nine children with a Chinese-speaking backgroundand seven children with an Arabic-speaking background.At the end of the data collection and analysis stages, it wasdetermined that a rich analysis had been achieved, as therewas repetition in the barriers identified by children fromeach of the three cultural groups.

The interviews were conducted at the participatingfamily’s home (n = 21) or at the child’s school (n = 4). Par-ents were requested to be in a separate room while theinterview with their child was taking place, in order to ensurethat their presence did not affect their child’s responses.This occurred for all but four of the interviews conductedwith children from Arabic-speaking backgrounds, whereone parent was either in the room or in close proximity, atthe parent’s request. An interpreter was present at three ofthe interviews conducted with Arabic-speaking backgroundfamilies, and all nine Chinese-speaking background families.The role of the interpreter was to assist in communicatingwith the child’s parent, ensuring that the parent understoodthe aims of the study and was comfortable with their child’sbeing interviewed. An interpreter was not present at four ofthe interviews with Arabic-speaking background families, atthe request of each parent, who felt that they and their childwere confident in speaking English.

An interview schedule was used to guide the progressionof the interview. Although a general list of topics wasexplored, the interviewee’s responses shaped the order andstructure of the interview. The questions were thereforeflexible, and varied from one interview to the next. Theinterview schedule was developed according to threeprominent themes in the literature on social inclusion forchildren: exclusion from school, exclusion from socialactivities and exclusion from social networks (Phipps &Curtis, 2001; Ridge, 2002; Adelman & Middleton, 2003).Children were asked questions such as ‘Can you tell mewhat type of things you do in a typical week?, ‘Is thereanything hard about school?’ and ‘Are you happy with theamount of time you spend with friends?’ (see Appendix 1).The interviews were tape-recorded and professionally tran-scribed verbatim. Following the interview, the parents weregiven a $25 book voucher to thank them and their child fortheir time.

An inductive thematic analysis (Morse & Richards,2002) was conducted to examine the major barriers tosocial inclusion identified by children. An inductive thematicapproach refers to the process of coding the data without

trying to fit it into a pre-existing coding frame or theresearcher’s analytic preconceptions, thereby ensuring thatanalysis is ‘data driven’ (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The codingprocess followed two stages: open coding and focused coding(Coffey & Atkinson, 1996). Open coding was employedbecause the researchers sought to identify barriers to socialinclusion at school, barriers to formal social activities andbarriers to social networks, evident in persistent words,phrases and concepts within the data. Following thecompletion of open coding of each transcript, a codingframework was developed and used to re-code each of thetranscripts, using focused coding. The researchers wentthrough each transcript to code the barriers identified foreach category of the coding framework: school, socialactivities and social networks.

Results

Results will be presented and discussed for each culturalgroup, as it was apparent during analysis that the barrierswere often unique to each cultural group. Common themesand variations across all cultural groups will then be discussed.Pseudonyms are used throughout the results in place ofeach child’s real name, in order to protect children’sidentities.

Australian-born English-speaking background

children

Nine Australian-born English-speaking background childrenparticipated in this study. Four of the children participatedin a formal social activity, such as swimming or Scouts,and most children reported attending school excursions andcamps. However, it was common for children to reportspending little or no time with their friends outside school.Key barriers to social inclusion for these children includedbullying at school, limited family economic resources andparental permission.

Bullying at schoolBullying and teasing were a significant issue for many childrenat school. When asked about children whom they did not likeat school, many children described bullying incidents.

He punches people and thinks he’s so tough...[Interviewer: Do you feel you fit in with yourfriends?] A little bit with my friends, but not a lotwith the other classmates… because they are reallymean… don’t let me play games with them… Theydon’t like me. (Nicole)

45 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

Classmates always pick on me and tease me andcall me names. [Interviewer: How does it make youfeel when they tease you?] Upset… because yesterdaytwo people were teasing me. (Lauren)

Limited economic resources A number of children identified lack of money as limitingtheir participation in social activities, at school and outsideschool. One child spoke of not being able to attend hisschool camp or participate in a school fundraising activity.

One [camp] has been but that was because of mon-eywise [that child did not attend]… I had a feeling Iwasn’t going anyway... We’ve got this hat pro-gramme on at the moment where you can make yourown hats… It’s just a bit of a fundraiser for theschool I think. [Interviewer: have you made any?] Iwas meant to make one today but mum didn’t havethe money… she will give me $5 next week. (Ben)

This child also indicated that he wasn’t able to participatein informal cricket. This child reported that it wasn’t moneythat was preventing him from getting the equipment, andthat he didn’t have the equipment because he likes to makehis own.

Haven’t got the bat, haven’t got the ball, andhaven’t got the wickets. I know how to make wicketsmyself but it’s just the bat and the ball. I can get theball. The bat is the easiest to make but I don’tparticularly like to make them. [Interviewer: Is itbecause of money that you can’t?] No, not money…I like to make my own things as well. That’s anotherhobby I like. (Ben)

Another child described how cost prevented her fromparticipating in gymnastics after school. Initially shereferred to other reasons why she couldn’t do gymnastics,reporting that she had not told her mother she wanted to dogymnastics, as it was:

something I want to do by myself when I am older.

However, as the conversation progressed it became clearthat her perception of her mother’s lack of money was akey limiting factor.

[Interviewer: Do you think gymnastics isexpensive?] Yeah [Interviewer: Is that one of thereasons you can’t do it?] Mum hasn’t got enough

money because she has to do bills, bills, bills andbills. (Lauren)

The fact that some children first reported reasons otherthan financial ones, such as something they want to do bythemselves, may indicate that they feel too ashamed to saythat their families cannot afford activities or that they havebecome accustomed to their circumstances, thereby ‘self-excluding,’ consistent with Ridge’s findings. Alternatively,referring to other non-financial barriers may be a copingstrategy employed by some children in the face of economichardship.

Parental permission Children from Australian-born English-speaking backgroundsrarely spent any time with friends or other children outsideschool hours. Some children had few friends, or friendswho were much younger than them. This may be becauseyounger children are more likely to accept them than peersof the same age.

There’s Jane, a friend in Prep [first year of schooleducation] is Sam. There’s Amy, Amy is really cute.[Interviewer: Is Amy in Prep too?] Yes. (Lauren)

Some children reported not being allowed to have friendsto play at their house or to visit their friends’ houses.While children did not speak about the ability to bereciprocal, it is possible that parents did not let theirchildren visit their friends’ houses if they were unable toreturn the favour.

My friends don’t come over because I’ve got a dog.[It] bites people… I ask Mum if I can go to myfriend’s house and she always says no… Mum neverlets me… Sometimes I wish I could spend time withthem [friends] over the weekend. [Interviewer: Canyou put the dog outside?] No, then it will bark whenthey go home. (Lauren)

Because I can’t go to his house because my mum’stoo stubborn and she had a fight with his mum.(Nicole)

Another child indicated that she did not have time tosocialise with friends because she had to complete house-work when she was at home.

I do the dishes, I do my room, I do homework, I dothe laundry… do dinner. (Lauren).

46 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

Although time is the overt reason cited by this child for notbeing able to socialise, it is reasonable to assume that thislack of time is due to parental expectations at home regardingher use of free time.

Children from Chinese-speaking backgrounds

Nine children from Chinese-speaking backgrounds wereinterviewed. Almost all of them were involved in a freesocial activity that was run at their school one afternoonweek (hip hop dancing and soccer). All the children reportedthat they participated in school excursions and camps butspent little time with friends after school or at the week-end. The major barriers to social inclusion identified forchildren from Chinese-speaking backgrounds were bullying,lack of time due to study and parental permission.

Only two children from Chinese-speaking backgroundsparticipated in other formal social activities beyond thoseprovided at the school, so it is not clear whether childrenwould participate in any activities if they were not providedfree by the school. One child who was not currentlyinvolved in any formal social activities indicated that theydid not want to participate in any activities.

[Interviewer: Are there any activities that you wantto do?] I don’t know… no. [At after school care] wewere doing hip-hop, I didn’t like that. I don’t reallylike dancing… I’m too lazy to dance. (Yu-wen)

This child also then indicated that his birthday had justpassed and gave the reasons why he wasn’t having a party.

[Interviewer: What did you do for your birthday?]Can’t be stuffed having a party… [Interviewer: Whynot?] Too lazy to set it up… it’s a school day and Ican’t be stuffed coming home and inviting everyoneto come. (Yu Wen)

Further into the interview, it became apparent that thischild had difficulty in naming his friends, which mightexplain his lack of enthusiasm for a birthday party.

[Interviewer: What are their names?] Let’s see.There’s – what is it, again? Oh now I can’t evenremember. (Yu Wen)

Bullying One boy gave conflicting descriptions of his desire forfriendship, describing how he made attempts to belong to afriendship gang, but then saying that he did not really want

to belong as his friends would fight one another and hurthim.

Sometimes I give them something, then they let mebe in the gang… sometimes he lets me be in thegang but I don’t want to be in the gang, but they letme… [Interviewer: Is there anyone you don’t like atschool?] Suyia because he keeps on being mean andhe says ‘I don’t want you to’ – like he – but myfriend, he says he’s going to come to my house buthe didn’t… He bashed Musu – but now he doesn’t[pause] so now he doesn’t bash him up. So if Suyiasaid, ‘bash me up, bash me up’ and then I didn’twant to bash him up and then he kept on saying thatand then I wanted to tell the teacher on him… Idon’t want him to be in the gang. (Hui).

Another child also spoke of children who were violent atschool.

Some kids be naughty… They might punch. (An-wen)

Lack of time due to study and homeworkTime required to study after school and at weekends was aprominent theme among children from Chinese-speakingbackgrounds, often preventing participation in social activities.Children from Chinese-speaking backgrounds spoke ofspending their time after school and at weekends doinghomework first, then being able to play.

[Interviewer: How much time do you have to spenddoing homework?] I think one hour or two hours[per night]. (Jian-min)

I’d study my Chinese… Usually just do my home-work if I have some and my projects. And thenmaybe I can have some breaks. (Li-ying)

The importance ascribed to studying may reflect culturalvalues held by both parents and children who associateacademic success with later social and economic position.Most children from Chinese-speaking backgrounds went toChinese school one day of the weekend for between threeand five hours. While they attended Chinese school to learnand/or improve their reading, writing and comprehension,Chinese school provided children with another social outletto spend time with their peers. One child reported that theyhad made friends at Chinese school.

I have some [friends] in my Chinese school. (Li-ying)

47 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

Parental permission Some children from Chinese-speaking backgrounds reportedthat they were not allowed to have friends to visit, norwere they allowed to visit their friends. They saw this ashaving significant implications for their friendships, as onechild explained.

[Lu-yung] told me I could go to his house but myMum doesn’t let me go to his house. So I don’tknow when… If I don’t go to his house I won’t be inthe gang. (Hui)

This child did not identify any reason why his motherwould not let him visit his friend. Further investigationof this issue is required from both a child and parentalperspective.

Children from Arabic-speaking backgrounds

Seven children from Arabic-speaking backgrounds par-ticipated in in-depth interviews. Most of the children spentlittle or no time with friends outside school, but six of thechildren participated in formal social activities with otherchildren each week. All the children reported attendingschool excursions, but three children did not attend schoolcamps. Overall, it appeared that the children who weresampled from Arabic-speaking backgrounds had exposureto many protective factors that safeguarded them againstthe experience of exclusion. The only potential barrier tosocial inclusion was inability to attend school camps.

Children participated regularly in a number of formalsocial activities such as soccer, swimming, taekwondo andfootball. Children also spoke of spending time in informalsocial activities.

Sometimes, like my Dad’s friends, like, [his] son,like, they all come over to our house and we play –sometimes a soccer match or a football match.(Safwan)

Although the children from Arabic-speaking backgroundsdid not report spending time with their school peers outsideschool, they had very strong social networks of largeextended families, in which they regularly spent time afterschool and on weekends with aunties, uncles, grandparentsand cousins.

Sometimes I go with my brother and I play soccer atthe park with my cousins or we go over to myuncle’s and play footy out here. (Jalal)

This is consistent with literature that proposes that Arabicculture places a lot of importance on close social relation-ships between family members, friends and relatives(Majeed & El-Baqiry, 2005).

Cultural values affecting attendance at school campsA few children said that they do not attend school camps,although the underlying reasons why they do not attendwere not clear.

I don’t go to the school camps… you stay too longbecause they go for five days or six days… Mumand Dad tell me to go… [Interviewer: OK, so it’snot because of money though?]… No – Mum andDad tell me to go… [Interviewer: But you just don’twant to go because you don’t want to be away thatlong?] … [nodding] I’ll forget Mum and Dad. (Jalal)

There has been camp but I can’t go… only becauseI don’t get the note for it… like I don’t get the per-mission slips to go… wouldn’t want to go. (Nasser)

It is unclear whether children’s non-attendance at camp isbased on parental values regarding participation at camps,or whether the children themselves feel uncomfortableaway from family and relations, or both. If camps areorganised by people who are not Muslims, the potential toobserve religious practices such as prayer time may bedifficult for children. Further exploration of these issuesfrom the perspective of children and parents is needed toidentify whether not attending school camps has an impacton whether a child feels included with his peers.

Discussion

This study demonstrated that many children had limitedsocial interactions and limited involvement in school andcommunity activities. It also identified the individuals,institutions and structures responsible for acts of exclusion.Barriers such as bullying, economic resources, parentalpermission, lack of time and inability to attend schoolcamps differed according to the child’s culturalbackground.

In seeking to identify the individuals, institutions andstructures responsible for acts of exclusion, this studyhighlighted that schools and community organisations mayinadvertently increase the risk that children will be sociallyexcluded. School excursions, school activities and schoolcamps are often too expensive for some families to participatein, as are community-based activities. Despite having anti-

48 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

bullying policies, this study also highlights that bullyingoccurs in the school environment. On an individual andcultural level, parental beliefs and values also appear toinfluence the time they allow their child to spend withother children, in extra-curricula activities or participatingin school-related activities. The finding that nearly all childrenin this study from Chinese-speaking backgrounds attendeda free after-school social activity highlights the benefits ofstructures that promote social inclusion, as these childrenremarked that study was a priority and consumed much oftheir time.

That money was a barrier to social inclusion is notsurprising, given that the families were living in low-SESareas; however, this was only a barrier for the Australianchildren, and even they often initially reported reasonsother than financial ones. The fact that some promptingwas required for these children to reflect on finances issomewhat inconsistent with Ridge’s study, where childrenfreely discussed how income affects their lives. This maybe due to a number of reasons, including the child’s ageand cultural background. Children in this study wereyounger than the children and adolescents included inRidge’s study, and so might have been less aware of theirfamily’s financial situation, or less able to conceptualise itas a barrier. It has been noted before that a child’s culturalbackground may affect the information that children discloseto interviewers. Given that Arab culture is based on theprinciple of complete respect and total obedience by childrentowards their parents (Majeed & El-Baqiry, 2005), it maybe less likely that children from Arabic backgrounds willcomment on the difficulties their family experiences.Similarly, children from Chinese backgrounds adoptcollectivist culture practices, attaching great importance torespect, obedience and cohesion among family members(Rosenthal & Feldmen, 1990).

Implications

This study has important implications for further research,in terms of both the process of the study and the findings.In relation to process, this study highlighted that childrenas young as nine are able to answer questions about theirsocial experiences. It also showed that it was possible toelicit information about barriers to exclusion withoutresorting to direct questions which could highlight negativeexperiences. However, the study also highlighted the needto interview parents as well as children in future research.By interviewing the child, the interviewer is able to understandhow children view their lives, but a child may be confusedabout their life because of their cognitive immaturity or the

lack of information given to them by their parents. Aparental perspective may be different from a child’s, andhaving both perspectives results in a more completeunderstanding of a child’s experiences.

In relation to the findings, the barriers reported in thisstudy help identify possible methods for promoting children’ssocial inclusion. The findings indicate that, althoughmoney is a barrier to social inclusion, there are severalother barriers that need to be considered, such as bullying,time and parental permission, and that they may differaccording to culture. Mental health promotion programmesthat attempt to promote social inclusion by, for example,offering free social activities may fail because socialdevelopment and physical activity are not strongly valuedby some cultural groups. Schools need to have in-depthunderstanding of the impact of culture on opportunities forsocial inclusion.

Limitations

Children were purposively selected, by area of residencerather than family income. Although this means that wecannot be certain that they are in a low socioeconomicposition, it was ethically important to include all childrenfrom the school, and not further highlight children whohave low incomes. Although this study has highlightedsome differences in barriers of social inclusion for childrenin three cultural groups, the groups might have differed onvariables other than culture. For example, children fromArabic-speaking backgrounds are less likely to be in singleparent families, as divorce is largely stigmatised and rare incomparison with Western rates (Hammad et al, 1999; Haj-Yahia, 2000). Only male children from Arabic-speakingbackgrounds participated in interviews. It is possible thatfemale children from Arabic-speaking backgrounds wouldhave identified other barriers to participation which mightbe gender-specific in Arabic culture.

Further sampling among different population groupsand in different school settings might have contributedadditional insights. However, the consistency of the dataacross families and the consistency with Ridge’s studysuggest that this study provides a good basis for under-standing barriers to social inclusion. The findings also con-firmed that, while there are commonalities in the barriersexperienced by children, there is also evidence of culturalvariation. The analyses indicated that further sampling anddata collection were required to explore:

whether or not children from Chinese-speakingbackground families would be likely to participate

49 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

in structured social activities if they were not providedfree by the schoolthe nature of barriers to social visits for childrenfrom Chinese-speaking background families the nature of barriers to attendance at school campsfor children from Arabic-speaking families and thesubsequent impact on social inclusion.

Conclusion

The results demonstrated that some of the children involvedin this study experienced exclusion at school, from socialactivities or in social networks. The major barriers to socialinclusion included bullying, time, money and parental per-mission, but varied across cultural group. Further culturallysensitive research is needed on the barriers to social exclu-sion, and development and piloting of social inclusion pro-motion programmes that seek to address these barriers.

Acknowledgements

We would like to extend our gratitude to the schools, culturalassociations, parents and children who assisted us with thestudy, in addition to Deakin University, Melbourne, forfunding this study. Dr Davis and Professor Waters aresupported by Victorian Health Promotion FoundationPublic Health Research Fellowships.

Address for correspondence

Elise Davis, McCaughey Centre, VicHealth Centre for thePromotion of Mental Health and Community Wellbeing,School of Population Health, University of Melbourne,Level 5, 207 Bouverie St, Carlton 3053, Australia. Email:eda@unimelb.edu.au. Tel: + 61 3 8344 0921. Fax: +61 39348 2832.

References

Adelman L & Middleton S (2003) ‘Social exclusion inchildhood: why and how it should be measured: somethoughts from Britain.’ Paper presented at the Social Inclu-sion: Australian Social Policy Conference, University ofNew South Wales, Australia.

Adelman L, Middleton S & Ashworth K (2003) Britain’sPoorest Children: Severe and persistent poverty and socialexclusion. London: Save the Children.

Attree P (2006) The social costs of child poverty: a sys-tematic review of the qualitative evidence. Children &Society 20 54–66.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2001) Census ofPopulation and Housing:

Socio Economic Indicators for Areas Australia. Cat. No.2039.0. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Backett-Milburn K, Cunningham-Burley S et al (2003)Contrasting lives,

contrasting views? Understandings of health inequalitiesfrom children in different social circumstances. Social Sci-ence and Medicine 57 613–23.

Braun V & Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis inpsychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 77–101.

Burchardt T (2000) Social exclusion: concepts and evi-dence. In: D Gordon & P Townsend (Eds) BreadlineEurope: The Measurement of Poverty. Bristol: Policy Press.

Bynner J & Londra M (2004) The Impact of GovernmentPolicy on Social Exclusion among Children aged 0–13 andtheir Families. A review of the literature for the SocialExclusion Unit in the Breaking the Cycle Series. Office ofthe Deputy Prime Minister, Department of Social Policyand Social Work, University of Oxford.

Coffey A & Atkinson P (1996) Making Sense of Qualita-tive Data: Complementary research strategies. ThousandOaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications.

Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care(2000) Promotion, Prevention and Early Intervention forMental Health: A Monograph. Canberra: Mental Healthand Special Programs Branch, Commonwealth Departmentof Health and Aged Care.

Davis C, Martin G, Kosky R & O’Hanlon A (2000) EarlyIntervention in the Mental Health of Young People: A liter-ature review. Adelaide: The Australian Early InterventionNetwork for Mental Health in Young People (AUSEINET).

Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indige-nous Affairs (2004) Department of Immigration and Multi-cultural and Indigenous Affairs Settlement Database.www.settlement.immi.gov.au/settlement/enterSelectReport.do.

Donnelly P & Coakley J (2002) The Role of Recreation inPromoting Social Inclusion: Perspectives on social inclu-sion. Toronto: The Laidlaw Foundation.

Fincher R & Saunders P (2001) Creating UnequalFutures? Rethinking poverty, inequality and disadvantage.Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

Fine GA & Sandstrom KL (1988) Knowing Children: Partic-ipant observation with minors. London: Sage Publications.

Gordon D, Adelman L, Ashworth K, Bradshaw J, LevitasR, Middleton S, Pantazis C, Patsios D, Payne S, TownsendP & Williams J (2000) Poverty and Social Exclusion inBritain. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

50 International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

Haj-Yahia MM (2000) Wife abuse and battering in thesociocultural context of Arab society. Family Process 39237–56.

Hammad A, Kysia R, Rabah R, Hassoun R & Connelly M(1999) Guide to

Arab Culture: Health Care Delivery to the Arab AmericanCommunity. Public Health Education and Research Depart-ment, ACCESS Community Health Centre, Dearborn.

Herrman H, Saxena S & Moodie R (2005) Promoting Men-tal Health: Concepts, Emerging Evidence and Practice.Geneva: World Health Organisation.

Kamerman S & Kahn A (2002) Beyond Child Poverty: Thesocial exclusion of children. New York: The Institute forChild and Family Policy, Columbia University.

Mack J & Lansley S (1985) Poor Britain. London: Allenand Unwin.

Majeed K & El-Baqiry J (2005) Parenting in a New Culture:The preschool years, raising Australian-born children of Ara-bic background effectively. Canberra: Northern MigrantResource Centre, Supported by The Australian GovernmentDepartment of Family and Community Services.

Marshall OC & Rossman G (1989) Designing QualitativeResearch. Newbury Park, USA: Sage Publications.

Milbourne L (2002) Unspoken exclusion: experiences ofcontinued marginalisation from education among ‘hard toreach groups’ of adults and children in the UK. BritishJournal of Sociology of Education 23 287–305.

Morse JM & Richards L (2002) Read me First for a User’sGuide to Qualitative Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA:Sage Publications.

National Crime Prevention (1999) Pathways to Prevention:Developmental and early intervention approaches to crimein Australia. Canberra: National Crime Prevention, Attor-ney-General’s Department.

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2004) Breaking theCycle Series: Taking stock of progress and priorities forthe future. London: Social Exclusion Unit, University ofOxford.

Phipps S & Curtis L (2001) The Social Exclusion of Chil-dren in North America. Halifax, Nova Scotia: Departmentof Economics and Community Health and Epidemiology,Dallhousie University.

Ridge T (2002) Childhood Poverty and Social Exclusion:From a child’s perspective. Bristol: Policy Press.

Rosenthal D & Feldman S (1990) The acculturation ofChinese immigrants: perceived effects on family function-ing of length of residence in two cultural contexts. Journalof Genetic Psychology 151 495–515.

Rychetnik L & Todd A (2004) VicHealth Mental HealthPromotion Evidence Review: A literature review focusingon the VicHealth 1999–2002 Mental Health PromotionFramework. Melbourne: Victorian Health PromotionFoundation.

Sawyer MF, Arney F, Baghurst P, Clark J, Graetz B, KoskyR et al (2000)

The National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing: TheMental Health of Young People in Australia. Canberra:Mental Health and Special Programs Branch, Common-wealth Department of Health and Aged Care.

Taylor J & Fraser A (2003) Eleven Plus: Life chances andfamily income. Melbourne: Brotherhood of St Laurence.

Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (2005) SocialInclusion as a Determinant of Mental Health and Wellbe-ing. Melbourne: Mental Health and Wellbeing Unit.

Walker R (1995) The dynamics of poverty and socialexclusion. In: G Room (Ed) Beyond the Threshold: Themeasurement and analysis of social exclusion. Bristol: ThePolicy Press.

Whiteford P (2001) Understanding poverty and socialexclusion: situating Australia internationally. In: R Fincher& P Saunders (Eds) Creating Unequal Futures? Rethinkingpoverty, inequality and disadvantage. Sydney: Allen andUnwin.

World Health Organisation (2001) The World HealthReport 2001. Mental Health: New Understanding, NewHope. Geneva: WHO.

51International Journal of Mental Health Promotion VOLUME 10 ISSUE 1 - FEBRUARY 2008 © The Clifford Beers Foundation

FF EE AA TT UU RR EE

Interview schedule for children

We want to know what your life is like and what type of things you do. We are going to ask you a few questionsabout your life. If you don’t want to answer any questions that is completely fine, just let me know and I canmove on to a different question.

Activity and participation

1. Can you tell me what type of things you do in a typical week? (eg school, activities, sport, hobbies,catching up with friends)

2. For each activity:Who do you do this activity with? How do you get to the activity? Tell me any good or bad things about the activity? What do you need to do this activity (eg soccer boots)?

3. Why do you do these activities instead of other activities? 4. What other activities would you like to do? Why do you think you aren’t involved in these? 5. Are you happy with the way you spend your time? What else would you like to be doing?6. How do your spend your weekends? 7. Do you sometimes go to birthday parties/movies? If not, why not?

School

1. Tell me about your school. What is your teacher like?2. What are the good things about school?3. Is there anything hard about school? Anything or anyone you don’t like?4. Do you feel that you fit in at your school? (are you comfortable) Why or why not?5. Do you go on school camps/excursions? If not, why not?

Social networks

1. Tell me about a time when you talked to someone about a problem/difficulty you had. I don’t want you totell me about what your problem was, but can you tell me why you chose that person to talk to and howtalking to them made you feel.

2. Are there other people you talk to about your problems as well? Tell me about them.3. Tell me about your friends (including children you go to school with). What is it like to hang around with

them? What do you think your friends think about you?4. Do your friends often come over to your house? Do you go to other people’s houses? How do you feel

about the amount of time you spend with your friends? 5. Do you have friends in your neighbourhood that you play with? If so, how often do you play with them?

APPENDIX