DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION OR SURVEILLANCE? STRUCTURES AND PRACTICES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE'S...

Scottish Youth Issues

Journal

Issue 9

Spring 2007

Scottish Youth Issues Journal | Issue 9 | Spring 2007

THE SCOTTISH YOUTH ISSUES JOURNAL

The Scottish Youth Issues Journal provides a forum for reflection on policy andpractice and for the dissemination of research on issues affecting young people –from education, health, housing and culture to employment, criminal justice andpolitics. Drawing mainly, but not exclusively from Scottish experience, theJournal is published twice a year and contains refereed articles, research papers,policy analysis and book reviews. It is addressed to academic specialists,researchers, practitioners in a range of disciplines and to those involved in makingpolicies affecting young people.

Editorial BoardArrangements for the appointment of a new Editorial Board are currentlyunderway and we hope to have a mix of previous and new board members tobring continuity to the editorial process.

However, we also wanted to give an opportunity for someone, academic orpractitioner, who might be interested in becoming a member of the Board to takeup one of the Board positions.

These are voluntary positions but needn't take up too much personal time. So, ifyou are willing and would like more information, please contact the Editors toregister your interest before Friday 8 June 2007.

Full details of Board Members will be included in the next edition.

Manuscripts for publication may be submitted to any member of the EditorialBoard, or directly to the Editors, Annette Coburn or Brian McGinley, Division ofCommunity Education, University of Strathclyde, 76 Southbrae Drive, GlasgowG13 1PP.

Editorial Board


ISSN 1469-0780

S c o t l a n d

Books for review should be sent to the Editors, Annette Coburn or BrianMcGinley, Division of Community Education, University of Strathclyde,76 Southbrae Drive, Glasgow G13 1PP.

All subscription enquiries should be addressed to:Scottish Youth Issues Journal Publication SalesYouthLink ScotlandRosebery House9 Haymarket TerraceEdinburgh EH12 5EZTel: 0131 313 2488Fax: 0131 313 6800Email: [email protected]: www.youthlink.co.uk

Design – Julie WilsonYouthLink ScotlandRosebery House9 Haymarket TerraceEdinburgh EH12 5EZTel: 0131 313 2488Fax: 0131 313 6800Email: [email protected]: www.youthlink.co.uk

Contact Addresses


ContentsPage

Editorial 5Annette Coburn and Brian McGinley

Democratic Participation or Surveillance?Structures and Practices for Young People’s Decision-Making 9Ken McCulloch

Finding Touch: Young Males, Sport and Civic Engagement in Australia 23Neil Hall

Not Such a Fair Go: An Audit of Chilldren’s and Young People’sRights in Australia 41Judith Bessant

Towards A Person-Centred ‘Culture’: The Use of CommunityDevelopment Approaches in the Independent Youth CounsellingService in West Belfast 57Pat Henry, Liz McArdle, Dr. Caryl Sibbett

Who is Youth Work For? Distortions and Possibilities 77Terry Barber

Think Piece 89Stuart Waiton and Simon Knight

Book Reviews 95

Notes on Contributors 99

Notes for Contributors 100

Contents


3


4

Editorial

EDITORIAL

Welcome to the first edition of the ‘new look’ Scottish Youth Issues Journal (SYIJ)developed through collaboration between the Scottish Centre for Youth WorkStudies at the University of Strathclyde and YouthLink Scotland, the nationalyouthwork agency for Scotland. As we go to press after a break of two years, afortnight of tragedy has left three young men shot dead in London. This has createda tsunami of media interest that sways between calls for tougher sentencing forthose who carry illegal weapons and increased provision of parenting classesthrough which, it is alleged, the streets will become safer and young people willhave more positive role models.

In the midst of the current tide, calls for the provision of facilities, seem rootedsomewhere between, ‘give them something to do’ and ‘keep them off the streets’ asa means of both diverting and controlling young people. Although a resurgence inthe development of ‘youth work’ per se may not follow, these tragic events raiseconcerns in a number of key areas that readers and contributors to this and otherjournals have examined over many decades. Young people and youth issues are nowbeing discussed on news and current affairs programmes, in high street cafés andbars across the UK.

These events come hot on the heels of two related and scathing reports, the first ofwhich is discussed later in this edition. The Institute of Public Policy Research(IPPR) report, Freedom’s Orphans: Raising Youth in a Changing World (IPPR,2006) and the UNICEF Report Card 7, Child Poverty in Perspective: An overviewof child well-being in rich countries (UNICEF, 2007), indicate significant concernsin terms of the well-being of young people and their relationships with adults – theReport Card is not a good one, the UK could do much better.

The Scottish Youth Issues Journal aims to provide an ongoing platform for criticaldialogue around youth work and youth issues long after the current news eventsand interest in these reports has waned. A new editorial team and some changes instyle and format will enhance these aims and highlight issues that unify or contesttheoretical or policy discourse.

The refreshed team would like to record their thanks to members of the precedingEditorial Board who have given years of support to the journal. In particular we areindebted to the previous editors, Ted Milburn (CBE) and Clive Rowlands, whoprovided firm foundations on which to build a successful periodical which willcontinue to strive to meet the demands of a challenging and diverse field.

The journal provides an avenue for analytical reflection on the principles, policiesand practices of youth work both nationally and internationally. However, the newlook journal will have a different feel to it through the introduction of two newitems in response to feedback from fieldwork practitioners and students in Higher


5

Editorial


6

Education. This means that in addition to regular features such as peer-reviewedarticles, policy analysis and book reviews, we are introducing a regular ‘Think Piece’item. This will offer a public space for contributors to raise issues and providecommentary or critique through informal writing that is not necessarily based onempirical research but may be derived from an engagement with literature, policydiscourse or practice.

In this edition, we are pleased to introduce a Think-Piece from Stuart Waiton andSimon Knight of Generation: Youth Issues. Those who are familiar with Stuart andSimon’s work will not be surprised to read their stimulating and thought provokingcommentary entitled, The Roots of Paedophobia. Their writing is both topical andpassionate in its critique of the IPPR Report and in highlighting concerns, forexample, in relation to the increasing suspicion in which volunteers are held and thedeepening regulation of young people.

The second new item, we are calling, ‘Conversations’. These will be real orimagined informal conversations or interviews that facilitate exploration of ideas,contemporary practice or contested discourse through conversational andquestioning dialogue. For example, how might Ivan Illich have responded to TonyBlair’s calls for ‘Education, Education, Education’, or the dialogue between a policymaker and an academic in examination of a concept, such as anti-social behaviour?We are keen to include ‘Conversations’ as a regular feature and look forward totesting this idea.

The target audience for the journal includes academics, practioners and policymakers who have an interest in youth issues. The journal will continue to be animportant source for students in both Further and Higher Education and we arealways keen to receive contributions from first time writers as well as moreestablished authors.

In this edition we have attracted contributions from across the world that illustratethe diversity and interconnectedness of youth issues from as far a field as Australiaand closer to home in Northern Ireland and Scotland.

Terry Barber examines who youth work is for by exploring common perceptions ofstatus and power to suggest how challenging negative representations provides anopportunity to develop meaningful relationships with young people. Thedevelopment of a creative Top-Down/Bottom-Up (TB) Model of YouthEngagement, encapsulates the nature and purpose of youth work within what istermed the Engagement Zone to build participatory cultures that galvanise Scottishinstitutions into unleashing the creative potential of the young people they purportto serve.

An audit on how Australia measures up to the UNConvention on the Rights of theChild forms the basis of a series of challenging assertions by Judith Bessant. A rangeof UN Articles are examined and the audit highlights the underpinning influence

Editorial


7

of institutional oppression of young people, in particular relation to schooling andpolicing. This raises concerns about the routine marginalisation and alienation ofyoung people and reminds us that continued collusion in programmes disguised inthe cloak of community safety, through the introduction of by-laws that criminaliseyoung people for simply associating with their friends, in the street is not acceptable.

A community development approach lies at the heart of a phenomenological studyon the independent Youth Counselling Service in West Belfast. In this article, theauthors, Pat Henry, Liz McArdle and Caryl Sibbett, develop the case for an alliancebetween community development and person centred approaches. This helps todetermine how empowerment is enhanced through focusing on the needs of theindividual. An interesting argument for promoting a holistic approach to youthcounselling is presented as beneficial to empowering both young people andpractioners. The article argues that a quality system of care will lead to self carewhich is crucial for the sustained development of well being.

By focusing on young males, sport and civic engagement, Neil Hall brings togetherthese three aspects to identify an opportunity which increases young people’sinvolvement and develops community efficacy. He recognises that while there iscontradictory research about the role of sport and civic engagement that thepotential remains for sport to be used as a catalyst for developing social capital. Forexample, it is argued that sport encourages volunteering and helps young people toexperience a sense of belonging, thus motivating sustained participation in civic life.

The theme of meaningful engagement in the decision making process is furtherdeveloped by Ken McCulloch, who details the pressure on participation projects toconform to the status quo by providing activity to occupy time and minimiseinstances of ‘hanging about’. The limitations of current consultative fora throughfailing to work with ‘the hard to reach’ young people are recognised with anemphasis on a responsibility or willingness to get involved rather than a democraticright. A range of participation fora are exemplified as double edged in that they maybe beneficial to individual participants or in relation to specific issues but that theyare also mechanisms of discipline and surveillance.

The articles and book review in this edition raise issues that are of centralimportance to the debate on the status, power and participation opportunities foryoung people across Scotland and the globalised world of today. The EditorialBoard is committed to publishing articles which advance understanding of youthissues and inspire readers to develop effective practice that enables young people tochallenge and change the unjust status quo. We offer this journal to you and trustthat you will be inspired!

Annette Coburn and Brian McGinleyFebruary 2007

Editorial


8

Democratic Participation or Surveillance? Structures and practices for young people’s decision-making


9

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION OR SURVEILLANCE?STRUCTURES AND PRACTICES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE’SDECISION-MAKING

Ken McCulloch

ABSTRACTThis paper argues that the engagement of young people in authentic decision making isboth necessary and problematic, and that while democratic action is often cited as anobjective of ‘participation projects’ there are powerful influences which drive such workin the direction of conformity with the status quo. The experiences of young people inthe Borders YouthChex programme are considered as an example of both thepossibilities for action of this kind and as revealing some of the limitations anddifficulties of such work. The first part of the paper examines the extent to whichparticipants in the programme are representative of the population of young people inthe Scottish Borders, and explores the experience of part icipation in area grantawarding panels. Brief case studies of individual area panels are presented, andconsideration is given to the nature of young people’s participation and to the characterand problematic nature of youth workers’ interventions in a youth participationproject. The specifics of this practice provide the basis for a discussion of some generalthemes and principles in relation to efforts to engage young people in authentic decisionmaking in a local context.

IntroductionThe idea that young people should be provided with opportunities to make theirviews felt on a range of topics is not new. At regional and national levels youthforums, youth councils and similar arrangements have been introduced either bygovernment action or independently in many countries at many times. At a moremicro level there is a long tradition in youth work settings of involving youngpeople in decision-making about programmes and activities. In the UK youthworkers have maintained and developed models of practice in which decisionmaking by rather than for young people is an important feature since the mid-twentieth century (Macalister Brew 1957) and earlier.

At the beginning of the twenty-first century policy in relation to youth and youngpeople in the UK has in many respects retained its focus on what Bernard Daviescalled ‘Threatening Youth’ (Davies 1986). An analysis of youth and youth workpolicy, and specifically an exploration of officially sanctioned structures for youngpeople’s participation in civic decision making reveals this old argument in a newperspective. The argument explored here is that participation through youthcouncils or other fora may be understood as a form of discipline intended to create

normative conformity. While individual young people may accrue benefits throughsuch participation the net effect of such initiatives may be to reinforce existingsocial differences and power relations.

In Davies’ critique of policy under the conservative governments of the 1980s it wasargued that the central thrust of policy on a range of matters impinging on the livesof young people, and particularly young working class men, was to control thethreat they represented to hegemonic consumer capitalism. Welfare benefits policy,employment policy, education and training were all designed to limit the freedomsof and to control the threat posed by large numbers of under or un-employedpeople with little investment in the status quo.

In recent years the way in which the view of young people as a threat is expressedhas shifted, becoming more direct and more individualised, through the developingdiscourse of ‘anti-social behaviour’. In this formulation the challenges youngpeople represent to social order are to be addressed through such measures asincreased policing by community wardens and by the introduction of powers todisperse groups of young people and to impose curfews. In bringing Davies’arguments up to the present, key drivers of policy have been, as Jeffs and Smith(2001) have shown, explicit concerns with ‘social exclusion’, ‘the knowledgeeconomy’, ‘joined up thinking’, transitions, and targets. In the same article Jeffs andSmith argue that individualization, as contrasted with concerns for community andsocial life, and surveillance in a practical sense are expressed through the collectionand retention of data on individual young people. It is not intended, in this paper,to deny or belittle the very real difficulties posed for many individuals, families andneighbourhoods by the actions of those targeted by such policy initiatives. Thedesire for a life free from fear, violence or intrusion of whatever kind is entirelylegitimate, and the good intentions of policymakers in relation to anti-socialbehaviour are not in question. What these current policy initiatives express, it isargued, is that the view of young people per se, and not only particular groups, asdangerous and threatening is deeply embedded.

At the same time, alongside and in contrast with that, the discourse of children’srights has been growing in prominence. Involving young people in decisions aboutpolicy and service delivery has become ‘a new orthodoxy’ (Badham 2004 p143).Young people’s voices are sought out through a range of structures and practices atlevels from the national and international, through youth councils, parliaments andconferences which consider ‘issues of the day’, to the very local where youthworkers and others actively seek to engage young people in decision making aboutimmediate and localised concerns.

There is also evidence for a more sceptical view. A broader perspective reveals thatdespite the rhetoric of a policy emphasis on young people’s voices being heard, thereality fails to match up. Badham (2004) presents a convincing case for identifyingmore robust models of participation but also clearly outlines some of the obstacles



10

faced by young people seeking to express their voice. The contradictions revealedby the protests of February 2003 against war in Iraq are simply the best known andmost dramatic of several examples cited.

A recent survey of young people in Scotland (MORI 2005) showed that only a tinyproportion of all young people were active in any kind of formal youth participationproject including all levels from the Scottish Youth Parliament to the level of schoolcouncils or local youth fora. Matthews & Limb also present findings from a studyof youth councils in the East Midlands which confirms the view that ‘for the vastmajority of young people, neither are their concerns systematically articulated noris the diversity of their voices listened to’ (Matthews & Limb 2003 p190).

It is against that background of, at best, ambivalence and at worst, hostility to youngpeople that some structures and practices represented as concerned with youngpeople’s ‘participation’ are examined here. It is tempting to treat these various waysof engaging young people’s interest in and involvement with decisions (or at leastthe expression of opinion) about a range of matters of contemporary relevance, atface value. The claims made for such practices and structures cannot be simplydismissed as unfounded. The participation of even quite small numbers of youngpeople in such activity must have some meaning if only for the participantsthemselves. Milburn (2000) for example argued that the ‘Connect Youth’programme has successfully engaged Scottish young people in decision making ona range of areas. Initiatives such as the youth conference linked to theCommonwealth Education Ministers’ triennial meeting in Edinburgh in 2003brought together young people from across the commonwealth, and participants’accounts suggest the experience of participation was valued and appreciated(15CCEM 2003). Against that background and history of both fear of young peopleand efforts to help them find and express their voices, projects and programmessuch as YouthChex have come into being.

The Borders ‘YouthChex’ ProgrammeThe YouthChex programme provides a case study of youth work with a strongfocus on decision making and participation by young people. The YouthChexprogramme was funded on a partnership basis through the EU LEADER+programme under the leadership of Borders Voluntary Youth Work Forum(BVYWF). The project aims were for young people themselves to develop andapprove small grants for local young people’s projects. To achieve this five locality‘panels’ were established with a remit to promote and allocate grants within theirareas, coterminous with the SBC Area Committee boundaries. Each area panel wassupported by a youth worker allocated by BVYWF and the project as a wholesupported by a coordinator based centrally in the local authority area.

The project was launched in the spring of 2005. Young people recruited toparticipate in panels were brought together for a residential weekend in June 2005.



11



12

This provided an opportunity for young people from the five areas to buildrelationships and to develop a shared understanding of the project’s purpose andpossible ways of working. Similar events were held in November 2005 and June2006, with the dual functions of project development and training through sharingof practice and problems, and as a positive ‘reward’ for the young people involved.

Oversight of the programme was maintained by an Advisory Group consisting ofyoung people representing the panels, youth workers and representatives offunders. The advisory group operated on the same ‘youth led’ basis as the panelsalthough given the different ratio of adults to young people adult contributionswere more significant here than at the panels. Panels were successfully establishedin all five areas with 8-10 young people recruited in each case. Recruitment used avariety of networks including schools and youth projects. Some young peopleresponded to publicity about the project whereas others were specificallyapproached by teachers and others. Panels met, generally on a weekly or fortnightlybasis, initially to decide how to promote the programme locally and subsequentlyto make decisions about applications as they began to come in.

The research methods used were conventional, with a mixture of questionnairesurvey and interview methods in the first phase of the study, and observation of thearea panels combined with continuing interviews in the second phase. Initially ithad been intended to approach the research using a more participatory framework,however the extent of young people’s time commitments, and the constraints onthe researchers’ time and energy were such that a more traditional approach wasrequired. Every effort was nevertheless made to engage young people as informantsin a dialogue rather than as objects of scrutiny.

The occasion of the first residential was used to survey all or most participants, usinga questionnaire to elicit data about the young people initially involved in theprogramme. Four key measures were identified, those being Gender, Educational orTransition status, Social Class, and Urban/Rural residence. Participants were askedto identify their educational and transitional status; what stage they were at inrelation to exams, work, the transition from school to work, further or highereducation. In addition participants were asked to identify themselves in respect ofgender and home address. Parents’ occupations were requested as a means ofidentifying social class differences. This data was collated and compared with 2001National Census data to establish the extent to which the young people participatingin YouthChex were ‘representative’ of young people in the Borders. Semi-structuredinterviews were undertaken with a sample of participants selected at random fromthose completing the questionnaire survey. These interviews were undertaken face-to face at the first residential, or by telephone over the following two months.

Three of the area panels were selected for closer scrutiny of the processes involved.This involved attendance and observation of the panels’ activities. The selection of



13

panels for inclusion in this stage sought to represent two main ranges of difference.It was important to represent the different kinds of localities, both the more urbanand the more rural, and also to select panels that were perceived as most successfuland those experiencing most difficulties. It is important to identify ‘what works’ aswell as identifying the nature of problems and difficulties in this kind of work.Selection was carried out in discussion with the YouthChex programmecoordinator. Three panels were selected and between 2 and 5 meetings have beenattended in each case, a total of 11 meetings were attended between October 2005and March 2006. The initial visits were exploratory but progressively it was possibleto develop some sensitising concepts to focus observation more critically. Inparticular we gave attention to the nature of workers’ interventions, to thecharacteristics of decision making and to the expression of leader/followerbehaviour in panel members. Alongside these visits a programme of interviews withpanel members was undertaken. These interviews were designed to monitor theextent of ongoing engagement and to provide the basis of comparison with initialaspirations in relation to the project itself and the experience and benefits ofparticipation as a panel member. Three members of each of the case-study panelswere interviewed on one or more occasions each, normally by telephone but withface-to-face interviews undertaken in several instances.

Of the young people over 16 involved in YouthChex, 77% were in full time educationas against 66% for the Borders as a whole. We can therefore say that young people whohave left school are somewhat underrepresented in the YouthChex project. The cohortnevertheless demonstrates some success in attracting young people from groups thattend to be under represented in youth participation projects. The cohort is notperfectly representative of the population of young people in the Borders; in shorthandit could be described as weighted towards middle class participants, as indicated by theproportions remaining in education and the parental occupations data. This is not at allsurprising, and comparisons with what is generally known about ‘youth participation’projects shows YouthChex to be succeeding in attracting some young people fromgroups that tend to be under represented in other participation models.

Of the 44 young people surveyed there were 27 Males and 17 Females. Althoughthis is clearly an imbalance the recruitment of almost 40% girls into a youthparticipation project is a considerable achievement. Youth Councils and YouthForums of a conventional kind have tended to attract far more boys than girls andthis project is less imbalanced in gender terms than we might have expected. It isalso worth noting that observation of panel meetings paints a somewhat differentpicture, with girls at least as prominent and in some cases more active than boys inthe work of the panels.

Establishing young people’s social class position is notoriously problematic. In thiscase we have used parental occupation as a proxy measure, on the assumption thatchildren’s social class position is close to that occupied by their parents and that



14

occupation is an indicator of social class position. The analysis shows that theYouthChex cohort differs from the averages for the Borders as a whole in severalkey respects. The proportion reporting that one or both parents were not workingwas under 10%, which compares to a figure of 26% in the Census. Similarly theproportion in Agriculture and Forestry (under 3%, Census 8%) and Manufacturing(6%, Census 18%). Conversely those reporting a parent working in Health or SocialWork were overrepresented at 22% of the cohort as compared to 13% for theBorders in the Census data. These findings need to be treated with some caution,as there are a number of ways distortions can occur. Young people’s descriptionsand understandings of what their parents do ‘at work’ are well known to be at best,limited, and at worst pretty unreliable. It is however safe to say that professional andnon-manual workers’ families are somewhat more likely to be represented in theYouthChex cohort than those of manual workers or unemployed persons.

Rural or urban residence is the most difficult category to be confident about. Withhindsight we might have asked young people to characterise their place of residencein ways that would help us analyse this aspect. However looking at the address andpostcode data has enabled a crude estimate to be made. This shows that virtually allthe participants live in a substantial settlement, the vast majority in one or other ofthe main towns. A smaller proportion live in what we would characterize as smallertowns or villages and virtually none had addresses that suggested an authenticallyrural degree of isolation. Again comparative figures were hard to find but we wouldsay that young people living a more isolated rural life on farms or in smallersettlements are under represented. The Panel members we met were uniformlywhite and able bodied, the overwhelming majority with Borders family ties. Wemake this observation out of a desire to offer a comprehensive analysis. It isrecognised that inclusiveness in youth work is an objective shared by all those wehave met in the YouthChex programme, and we raise it here simply as an issuewhich should not disappear from attention but which we know will remainproblematic to fully address.

Analysis of the interview data is particularly revealing in relation to the motives andvalues of the young people who became involved in YouthChex. Firstly there was ahigh degree of consistency among the young people regarding their motivations andaspirations in respect of the programme. Respondents typically spoke aboutproviding activities and facilities to keep young people constructively occupied. Aneed for alternatives to ‘hanging about drinking and doing drugs’ was frequentlycited. Second it is worth noting the attitudes to involvement in decision making thatwere expressed. While on the one hand it was clear that most young people wantedtheir voices to be listened to and taken seriously, there was a widespread acceptancethat adults were and should be entitled to make decisions on the grounds of greatermaturity and experience. There is little evidence in this data of rebellious ‘threatening’youth, rather of a group of thoughtful young people who recognize the limits of theirown potential as well as aspiring to maximise that in the context of their involvement.

The interview included an opportunity for respondents to talk about what theythought were the major issues and aspirations for young people in the Borders.Responses in this respect fell into three clear categories, those concerned with values,with facilities and services (transport in particular) and those concerned withbehaviours related to drinking and drug use.

The area panels succeeded in generating local funding applications and scrutinisingthose applications, demonstrating a careful and thoughtful approach to the processand responsibilities of awarding funding. Panel members approached the varioustasks and processes in ways that indicated a strong sense of responsibility. Processesof dissemination of information, encouragement of applications and processing ofawards were slower and perhaps more difficult than had been envisaged at theproject planning stage. Panel meetings were normally chaired by one of the youngpeople and the workers evidently understood their roles as being to giveinformation, to raise questions in relation to criteria for awards, to help the panelidentify and prioritise tasks, and to provide various forms of practical support.There is a tension to be managed, between on the one hand allowing the panel tomake the running, to make mistakes and so on, and on the other the workers’ desireto help the panel work effectively. This is an extremely difficult path to negotiateand some workers are more successful than others; indeed most workers appearmore successful on some occasions than others.

In the brief case studies that follow individuals are not named, nor are the panelsidentified by name. The particular characteristics are such that those involved mayrecognise themselves and one another but it is important to maintain some limitedconfidentiality in a paper for a wider audience.

Panel A

This panel was based in a well defined small town. The panel members wererecruited from the local High School and meetings took place in a localyouth project. It was selected for inclusion in the research on the basis thatgood progress appeared to be being made from the early stages. Significantcharacteristics of this panel were a ‘light hearted’ atmosphere emphasising adegree of enjoyment by the participants. The degree of structure in themeetings observed was variable; some meetings had a clearly set agenda butin some cases the meetings were less clearly organised. A feature of meetingswith less structure was a much stronger leadership role being adopted by theyouth worker.

All the young people worked well together. The dynamics were similar fromweek to week, with two young people tending to dominate discussions andcontribute the most. This was fairly consistent across the sample of meetingsobserved. Some inconsistency in attendance was observed, with a core ofabout five who attended regularly.



15

Progression was observed over the period of observation, with several clearpatterns. During the earliest meetings observed, the variability in structurewas more evident than in later meetings. It was also noted that at theearlier meetings the older panel members were most vocal and most activein taking the lead. At later meetings there were signs of increasingconfidence among individual younger members, and of a stronger sense ofcollective responsibility.

Participants tended to remain engaged with only two withdrawals known tothe researchers, one of which was later discovered to be associated with abereavement. Individual contacts with panel members showed a consistentpicture of positive engagement and enthusiasm for the project.

Panel B

Panel B had some unusual characteristics, mainly arising from the character ofthe catchment area. A predominantly rural part of the Borders covered by twoHigh Schools about 10 miles apart. This panel was selected for study partlybecause of the difficulties experienced in the early stages, most of which wereattributed to that particular geographical character. Early on a decision wasreached to alternate meetings between the two main population centres andobservation of meetings commenced after that decision had been reached.

The travel dimension was clearly an important feature, impacting on startingand finishing times, which had to be tightly managed to enable participants’travel arrangements to be coordinated. It was not always possible foreveryone to attend or for every member always to stay for the full durationof the meeting.

The worker in this case was notably proactive in discussions both of ageneral kind and in relation to, for example, particular applications. It wasclear that a strong desire to support genuinely autonomous decision makingby the panel was frequently in tension with a concern to help the panelmembers make progress. Alongside that the worker was clearly concerned tohelp the panel avoid pitfalls that were evidently apparent to the workerbefore most of the panel members.

Notwithstanding the early difficulties, this panel appeared to be verysuccessful in meeting the objectives of participation by young people.Meetings were well organised by the young people and effectively chaired.Roles such as chair and minute taker were rotated to allow differentmembers to learn and develop these skills.

Panel C

This panel was based in one of the most urbanised parts of the Borders.Meetings were held in a local youth project, which was evidently reasonablyeasy for all participants to reach. It was selected to represent the more



16

urbanised dimension, and also because it appeared to have been particularlysuccessful in the early stages of the programme. Meetings of this panel werecharacterised by a relatively low level of interventions by the worker and bycomplex, ‘multi-layered’ discussions with several topics often beingconsidered in parallel at the same time.

As with the first two cases differences in levels of participation wereassociated with age; older members were more confident initially but overtime younger members visibly grew in confidence. Levels of engagementwere maintained and this panel was particularly active in taking control of itsown practices and procedures. In particular this panel made some decisionsto vary the processes for applications and documentation of the grantapplication process.

One of the meetings observed in this case involved panel membersinterviewing grant applicants. These interviews were conducted without thepanel’s own youth worker present but applicants were accompanied by anadult (a parent or some other adult associated with their project). It wasconsistently difficult for the panel members to concentrate the interview onthe young person making or representing the application, and the adultsinvolved demonstrated relatively low levels of understanding of the ‘youthparticipation agenda’. In one case the adult ended up dominating thediscussion for ten minutes or more, and only a fairly forceful intervention bythe panel chair restored the balance of power.

There are three significant findings that emerge from scrutiny of the panelprocess. These should be understood as generalised findings from a context withsignificant variability. The panels operated in widely differing contexts and foundthemselves facing different constraints and advantages in each case. While a simplecomparison might lead to a view that some panels have been more or lesssuccessful, our view is that these variations are largely accounted for by reference tothese contextual variations.

First it should be said that the panels have all ‘produced the goods’ in terms ofgenerating local funding applications and scrutinising those applications. Thepanels have consistently demonstrated a careful and thoughtful approach to theprocess and responsibilities of awarding funding. The panel members haveapproached the various tasks and processes in ways that indicate a strong sense ofresponsibility. Advisory group meetings exhibit many of the same features as thepanels and are not the subject of separate detailed comment.

The processes of dissemination of information, encouragement of applications andprocessing of awards has been slower and perhaps more difficult than was perhapsrather optimistically envisaged. The first grant was not paid out until the beginningof November and although the rate of payments has increased it seems unlikely that



17



18

the full allocation to each panel will have been disbursed within the year. Thismight be interpreted in a number of ways but given the various delays in startingthe project it is not surprising that this aspect also shows a degree of delay. It shouldhowever be noted that this was a problem anticipated from the start and the fundingapplication specifically acknowledges the potential problems in this respect.

The third and most important area of interest is in relation to the nature andproblems of youth workers’ interventions in a youth participation project. It is veryclear that all the workers we have observed are strongly committed to the principleof the project being led and directed by young people. Panel meetings are normallychaired by one of the young people and the workers evidently understand theirroles as being to give information, to raise questions in relation to criteria forawards, to help the panel identify and prioritise tasks, and to provide various formsof practical support.

A focus on observation of the worker’s interventions at a panel meeting does, insome cases, reveal a degree of directing or leading behaviour by the worker. Thiswas evident in all three of the panels observed. There is a difficult tension to bemanaged, between on the one hand allowing the panel to make the running, tomake mistakes and so on, and on the other the workers’ desire to help the panelmake good decisions and avoid problems and difficulties that they may notanticipate due to lack of experience.

DiscussionThere is a growing literature on young people’s citizenship and participation.Smith, Lister et al (2005) argue that the assumptions on which policy in relation toyoung people’s citizenship is based arise from misperceptions of youth and youngpeople. The study of young people in Leicester found that young people subscribedto a range of different conceptions of citizenship. The two dominant models werecharacterised as, first, the ‘respectable economic independence’ model whichstresses the importance of waged employment and economic participation asprerequisites of respectable citizenship. The alternative offered by the ‘sociallyconstructive participation’ model which emphasised particular values and theirexpression through a range of different kinds of action including activities withpolitical content or implications.

Sinclair (2004) provides a useful overview of the contemporary state of the variousdebates and issues in relation to children’s participation. The article argues thatthere are many areas where the improvement of practices relating to children’s andyoung people’s participation in decision making is necessary. More generally itoffers up a challenge for the future, to move beyond isolated acts and practices to asituation where young people’s participation is ‘not an add-on but an integral partof the way adults and organisations relate to children’ (Sinclair 2004 p116).



19

A wide range of structure and practices might be considered as examples of moreor less formal, more or less officially sanctioned means of providing mechanismsand opportunities for young people to participate in social decision making. At thenational level in Scotland a Scottish Youth Parliament (SYP) was set up in 1999, inparallel with the formation (or reinstatement as some would have it) of the newScottish Parliament and asociated structures and mechanisms. The Scottish YouthParliament is a useful contrast to the YouthChex programme, having a national asopposed to a local focus and frame of operation.

The Scottish Youth Parliament is described on its own website as having nearly 200members elected to represent the voice of young people aged between 14 and 25.The parliament meets three times each year to discuss the issues of the day, it has asmall executive with the function of organising the Parliament’s business whichevidently meets around monthly. Some of the issues that have had some kind ofattention from the SYP include Civil Partnerships, University top-up fees, nationalservice, the age of consent and various aspects of the school system. SYP has howeveryet to demonstrate any significant impact on young people’s general level of politicalinterest or engagement. It is almost certainly a valuable and enriching experience forparticipants and there is some evidence of SYP succeeding in bringing issues togreater prominence than might otherwise have been the case. There can be littledoubt that for many or most of those young people involved in such a venture andtheir adult supporters, this is an endeavour undertaken with the utmost sincerityand commitment.

At the other end of the scale in terms of scope and context we would find somepractices and structures intended to give young people a voice in decision makingin many if not most youth groups whether part of a national organisation ormovement, or a more locally based ‘organic’(Smith 1988) youth club. In suchsettings it is common to find either a quasi-representative framework such as amembers’ committee, or a more participatory framework where any youngmember who cares to can be involved in contributing to decisions about what theprogramme should be, how the funds should be spent or what kinds of behaviourand sanctions should operate in the group or club. A focus on process would alsoshow that most youth workers, whether paid or voluntary, professionally qualifiedor ‘organic’, will tend to make decisions with and alongside rather than for, theyoung people they work with.

What these examples show is that there are structures and practices at multiplelevels intended to give young people a voice. It appears that the aspiration is moreeasily met at the micro level of decisions about local and immediate matters than atthe scale of larger issues and national policy. There are two distinct effects to beconsidered when seeking to explain the meaning of these phenomena. Firstly it isimportant to examine what participation in such a structure or practice may meanfor those young people who are directly involved. Secondly, and equally



20

significantly, the effect on a wider constituency of young people needs to beconsidered. In the case of a national youth forum or parliament it is legitimate toconsider every young person in the country, whereas in a local context a morecautious approach is required. It would be an over simplification to say that oneshould consider every young person within a notional geographic catchment areabut the wider constituency may need to be wider than simply the actual membersof or attenders at the group in question.

A more critical perspective is however necessary if alternative meanings andexplanations of these phenomena are to be adduced. An important theoreticalfoundation of this particular exploration is Foucault’s (1991) conceptions ofsurveillance and discipline. This framework has been selected firstly for itsresonance with the idea that policy and practice in respect of young people has as akey purpose the protection of power interests from the threat understood to beposed by young people. Secondly it is argued that Foucault’s analysis of thehistorical emergence of ‘the disciplinary society’ (1991, 218) provides anappropriate theoretical tool for the interpretation of structures and practices asexpressions of power. One critical requirement of such an analysis is to recognisefrom the outset that discipline and surveillance are both somewhat ambivalentconcepts. A liberal-left sensibility tends to associate such notions withauthoritarianism and the controlling ‘Big Brother’ of an Orwellian dystopia. InFoucault’s usage of these concepts however they are more neutral, describing‘techniques for assuring the ordering of human multiplicities’ (1991, 218) whichare both necessary and helpful in maintaining the continuing production ofeconomic and social goods including knowledge and health as well as formaintaining the power of states and governments.

Discipline in Foucault’s sense suggests ways of seeing the distribution ofindividuals, through enclosure by both physical and conceptual boundaries. Closelyrelated is the notion of partitioning, the separating of individuals and groups amongdisciplinary spaces, most obviously in institutional settings such as schools. Asecond element is the control of activity through timetables and programmedactivities. Through discipline, it is argued, human beings become both moreproductive, through the concentration of individual actions to a larger whole, andalso more easily controlled and directed through the operation of power.Surveillance is a necessary condition for as well as an instrument of, discipline inthis sense, most youth work can be understood to incorporate an element ofdisciplinary surveillance. It may be that ‘participation projects’ are simply anotherkind of youth work and that they are neither more nor less concerned with controland oversight than the local youth club or scout group.

The argument is that the structures and practices referred to here are mechanismsof disciplinary surveillance. Viewed through a Foucauldian lens the youth forum oryouth parliament becomes both on the one hand a structure of discipline and a



21

means of surveillance. By acquiescing to the legitimacy of such a mechanism youngpeople, as a category, are disciplined, the voices expressed through the disciplinarystructure legitimised as the voices of all young people. Dissent is thus constrainedand even ignorance of the nature and operation of the structure does not serve as aground for alternative expressions. Surveillance is both more general and morecomprehensive. It is not only the specific structures or practices of participation, inyouth work contexts, that provide the conditions for the exercise of a disciplinarygaze. In this analysis youth work in all its multifarious forms can be understood assurveillance. Young people and the adults who work with them are incorporatedquite unknowingly in a network of practices, which have as their most fundamentalpurpose the production of social and political norms.

During the last quarter of a century a dominant view in relation to young peoplewas that social welfare and state intervention had had many negative effects on theattitudes of youth in general, and young working class men in particular. Far frombeing seen as acquiring adult status, the transition through adolescence was to beunderstood as increasing the threat which these young people present to socialorder. Many young people, it was argued, choose to abstain from work, because lifeon the dole is more attractive. In this framework they are understood as athreatening phenomenon ‘because they are (perceived as) immoral and have littlerespect for others or their obligations.’ (France 1998, p109). Policy from the 1980sthrough to the present has been driven, at least in part, by such an analysis. Youngpeople who were unable to access work opportunities or post-school education,were seen as a dangerous liability, requiring control rather than support. Nowherewas this clearer than in the ways social security legislation was used to forceunemployed young people to remain in their parental homes well into their mid-twenties (Furlong and Cartmel 1997).

Communitarian influences in social policy have become more prominent since themid-90s but it still appears that young people are seen as a problem rather than asmembers of the body politic entitled to rights. Obligations are given a much higherpriority than rights in the communitarian discourse, and although the language hassoftened, to allow us to talk about socially excluded young people rather than aboutan underclass, the message is not so different. Young people are still often understoodas existing somehow “outside” normal society. Rights are seen as contingent on thefulfilment of obligations; as a reward for conformity rather than as an absolute moralentitlement. In this understanding of our relationship to one another and to the state,there are no unqualified or universal rights (Crimmens 1999).

Rights and citizenship, in this interpretation, are structurally determined. It is asmeaningless and simplistic to think of all young people as “equal citizens” as it is toimagine that other opportunities are distributed equally. Poverty itself, according toLansdown, ‘denies children the rights of citizenship; the right to respect and value asa member of society’ (Lansdown 1995, 116). According to a Scottish Executive policy



22

document (Scottish Executive 1999) in 1999, 17 per cent of 16-19 year olds were notin employment or education, and the proportion of 16-19 year olds not inemployment or education has remained fairly steady over recent years. It is thissignificant excluded minority that are the focus both of anxieties about social orderand antisocial action, and of efforts to reduce the numbers excluded in these waysfrom both economic and more socio-political forms of participation. Projects likeYouthChex are effective in engaging those young people who are already most likelyto vote and act politically. Macro structures such as youth parliaments and forums arenever going to make much if any difference at all to the lives of the small percentageof young people structurally excluded and disenfranchised, whereas smaller scalelocal programmes with their focus on those positive objectives clearly have thepotential to produce some benefits for those young people in respect of participation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY15CCEM 2003 The Edinburgh Communiqué 15th Conference of Commonwealth Education Ministers.

Badham, B. 2004 ‘Participation - for a Change: Disabled Young People Lead the Way’ Children & Society18, pp143-154

Crimmens, D. W., A 1999 ‘Rights-Based Approaches to Work With Young People’, in S. Banks (ed)Ethical Issues in Youth Work, London, Routledge.

Davies, B. 1986 Threatening Youth; Towards a National Youth Policy,Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Foucault, M. 1991 Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, London: Penguin Books.

France, A. 1998 ‘“Why Should We Care?”:Young People, Citizenship and Questions of SocialResponsibility’, The Journal of Youth Studies 1 (1), p97-111.

Furlong, A. and Cartmel, F. 1997 Young People and Social Change: individualisation and risk in late modernity,Buckingham: Open University Press.

Jeffs, T. and Smith, M. K. 2001 Social exclusion, joined-up thinking and individualization – new labour’sconnexions strategy, Vol. 2004, The Informal Education Encyclopaedia.

Lansdown, G. 1995 ‘The Children’s Rights Development Unit 1995’, in B. Franklin (ed) The Handbookof Children’s Rights: comparative policy and practice, London, Routledge.

Macalister Brew, J. 1957 Youth and youth groups, London: Faber & Faber.

Matthews, H. and Limb, M. 2003 ‘Another White Elephant? Youth Councils as Democratic Structures’Space and Polity 7(2), pp173-192

Millburn, T 2000 ‘Connecting With Young People and Youth Issues’ Youth & Policy 68, p46-57

MORI 2005 Being Young in Scotland 2005: Young People’s Participation in Youth Work, Arts, Cultureand Sport Edinburgh; Scottish Executive Education Department.

Scottish Executive 1999 Social Justice… A Scotland Where Everyone Matters, Edinburgh, TheScottish Executive.

Sinclair, R. 2004 ‘Participation in Practice: Making it Meaningful, Effective and Sustainable’ Children &Society 18, pp106-118

Smith, M. 1988 Developing Youth Work: Open University Press.

Smith, N. Lister, R. Middleton, S. Cox, L 2005 ‘Young People as Real Citizens: Towards an InclusionaryUnderstanding of Citizenship’ The Journal of Youth Studies 8 (4), p425-443.

Finding Touch: Young males, sport and civic engagement in Australia


23

‘FINDING TOUCH: YOUNG MALES, SPORT AND CIVICENGAGEMENT IN AUSTRALIA’

Neil Hall

ABSTRACTThis paper explores what civic engagement may mean to young males in Australia,and the role that sports may play in developing or enhancing civic engagement amongstyoung males. A review of worldwide literature discusses many of these aspects, withparticular focus (emerging from the author’s own doctoral research with young males)being given to the dimensions of ‘a sense of belonging to community’, ‘a sense ofcontribution to community’, and ‘sport as a pathway to social activism and resistance’.

Young males in transitionYoung males in Australia, as in many western cultures, currently face the prospectof negotiating a transition to adulthood and developing a sense of belonging andcontribution to their community in an environment where the meaning ofcommunity is becoming increasingly more uncertain. It is well established thatwhen young people feel that they belong this builds resilience and thereforeenhances their transition to adulthood. Matthews (2000) argues that when youngpeople are civically engaged, in a non-patronising or non-tokenistic way, it providesthe opportunity for an entire community to be strengthened.

Traditionally, young males affirm their sense of worth and manhood through ritesof passage. The problem that confronts them is that contemporary western culturehas to a large extent lost these notions of rites of passage. Van Gennep (1908)identified the rite of passage as a threefold process of segregation, transition andincorporation. In other words, there is a natural separation of child/adolescent fromthe community, followed by a time of trials, and completed by the return tocommunity in heroic adventures. Rites of passage therefore have two key functions:proving maturity/adulthood and reintegration into the community as an adult. Inthe absence of culturally derived rites of passage many young males will thereforegenerate their own contests, and these will often result in greater risk-takingbehaviour. Unfortunately, young males are often maligned and marginalised by theadult community rather than celebrated for their risk-taking exploits. Therefore,the purposes of the rite of passage remain unfulfilled.

It is an apparent problem that the adult community, outside of the sporting arena,tends to denigrate youth and masculinity rather than celebrate it. The ‘anti-socialbehaviour’ (for want of a better term) of predominantly young males continues toadd fuel to this. Admittedly there is correlation between men’s sport and violence,


pursuit of stereotypical body images, and other forms of ‘anti-social behaviour’.Accordingly, some feminist analyses often suggest that it is necessary to redefinenotions of masculinity for the purposes of a more positive civic engagement.Burstyn (1999) in particular is adamant that sport is an arena in which male violenceis sanctioned, and correlates sports with ‘hypermasculinity’ which embodies lack ofcompassion, aggression, hyper-competitiveness and sexism. She argues that this iscental to the defence of male dominance. This, however, seems to deny the pluralityof masculinity without taking into account hegemonic processes. The profeministmasculinity politics perspective (e.g. Pease, 2003) counters that there are multipleforms of maleness and that male sexism in fact oppresses males as well. From thisperspective, it is plausible that a celebration, rather than denigration, of masculinitycan lead to positive pro-social development in young males. This has particularrelevance when considering the role of stereotypical male pursuits such as sport.

The high participation rate of young Australian males in sport (approximately 39%)is undeniable, although it is also the case that these participation levels dropsignificantly after high school. Years of research confirms the many benefits ofsports participation, including physical health and well-being and various sets ofindividual traits (such as communication skills, teamwork skills, sense of fair play,conflict resolution and improved academic performance at school). Less literaturehas focused on the social or community-oriented benefits of sports participation,and the connections between sports and civic engagement. This paper explores thepossibility that sports participation is a pathway to civic engagement by youngmales, and that sport itself is a key way in which young males themselves feel likethey are part of their community life.

Notions of civic engagementAs with most areas of study, the definition of civic engagement is an adventure initself. Comparable and related terms found in the literature include civic participation,community participation, citizenship, active citizenship, civic service, politicalengagement, public participation, public achievement, social democracy, socialresponsibility, social inclusion and social capital. These give some idea of the breadthof thinking on this subject around the world.

Much of the literature attempting to define civic engagement seems to indicate aslightly different focus across different countries and cultures. For example, muchof the North American literature (e.g. Lopez and Moore, 2004; Ostrander, 2004;Wulff, 2003; Kirlin and Kirlin, 2002) incorporates questions of simply whetherpeople vote, or whether people are ‘good’ citizens in terms of respect for socialconventions and social institutions, or whether they participate in decision-makingabout the life of their ‘community’. It appears the bulk of this literature isinherently conservative in its ideology and morality. Some of the UK literature is alittle broader (Blunkett, 2003; Pattie et al, 2003; Ruston, 2003; Bryant, 2001;Giddens, 1998; Henderson et al, 1998) and incorporates aspects of taking a stand on


24


a social issue, or overcoming adversity to participate in broad public decision-making processes, through to New Labor’s concept of ‘no rights withoutresponsibilities’ (which is essentially a clamp on what they consider to be ‘anti-social’ behaviour). Australian and NZ literature (e.g. Hall, 2004; Panelli et al, 2002;Hall and Mason, 2000; Hartley, 1997; White, 1990) often places the concept in thearena of what to do about public space issues or how people are involved incommunity management. Alternatively, some literature (Seyfang, 2003; Shomina etal, 2002; Encarnacion, 2001; Jeffs, 2001; Van Benschoten, 2000; Ashutosh, 1997;)indicates a more pronounced political edge, suggesting that young people involvedin resistance and public demonstration are not being anti-social but are, in actuality,showing political and civic engagement.

There are earnest attempts to identify and measure multiple dimensions of civicengagement such as news attentiveness, willingness to speak in public meetings orsign petitions, attitudes about making a difference, the level of voluntary work withnot for profit organisations, preparedness to boycott a product/service or to join apublic demonstration, and participating in fundraising events. In fact, Canada25(2005) summarise eight main modes of engagement as political engagement, socialactivism, volunteerism, religious and cultural engagement, play and expression,international engagement, philanthropy and virtual engagement.

In the context of these differences, there do seem to be some commonalities acrossthe literature that constitutes a kind of working definition of civic engagement. Inshort, civic engagement involves some kind of participation in the life of the definedcommunity. However, there is also a sense that civic engagement is a process bywhich people learn or understand the way their community/society works and thenbecome involved in social or public activities based on that new understanding. Onone hand, there is an intellectual and emotional engagement, and on the other amore practical engagement. These learning and/or action processes may be carriedout in collaboration with community workers or other people with previousknowledge and experience, and hence civic engagement can provide a forum fordifferent varieties of mentoring to occur. The specific form that the practicalengagement takes varies significantly from place to place, depending on needs,social structure, opportunities, and other factors. Similarly, intellectual engagementis not beholden to any one political or sociological perspective. In fact the literatureappears to range from the ultra-conservative to the ultra-radical in this respect.

Defining sportIn coming to an understanding of the role of sport in civic engagement by youngmales, it is important to find a working definition of sport. Hill (2002) cites Mason(1989) who defines sport as ‘a more or less physically strenuous, competitive,recreational activity…’ (Hill, 2002 pp10-11). Coakley (2003) would consider this tobe a reasonably traditional definition of sports, and embellishes it with sport as‘institutionalised competitive activities that involve rigorous physical exertion or the


25



26

use of relatively complex physical skills by participants motivated by internal andexternal rewards’ (2003, p21).

There are a number of difficulties with these definitions. For example, the lineseems fairly arbitrary as to how much physical exertion is required to qualify anactivity as a sport. Secondly, if sport is an institutionalised physical activity, itexcludes many forms of activity in which people engage that is not formalised (forexample, skateboarding or surfing), although some texts (e.g. Volkwein-Caplan,2004; Calloway, 2004) offer ‘leisure’, ‘recreation’ or ‘play’ as an alternative morebroadly inclusive definition, and make the pragmatic distinction based on the extentto which the activity is formalised or competitive in its nature.

McPherson, Curtis & Loy (1989) provide an overview that incorporates multipledimensions of sport. They see sport as structured in that it is in some way governedby rules, limited in time and space, with codes of conduct (written or tacit). Sportis goal-oriented because it involves achievement and offers various forms of contestand self-testing. Sport is competitive either through participants being pitted againstother participants combatively in the same area (e.g. rugby, boxing), or byparticipants taking turns or contesting in separate areas (e.g. swimming, golf), orwhere participants are scored against some form of benchmark (e.g. archery,gymnastics). Finally, they describe sport as ‘ludic’ (from the Latin ludus meaningplay or game) because it involves an uncertain outcome and a sanctioned display.They say this is what makes sport playful and fun.

There appears to nothing significantly different about definitions of sport fromAustralia or the Southern Hemisphere so it may be fair to assume that, in the main,the Australian interpretations fall in line with US or British ideations, although intrying to understand the Australian context, Kell (2000) states that ‘Australians are,to a remarkable extent, obsessed by sport… Australians have a powerful belief thatsport is one of the few social institutions where everyone gets a fair go’ (2000, p9-10). However, he argues that sport forms social hierarchies based on class, race,gender and ethnicity, which reinforce and perpetuate social inequalities. Contraryto popular belief, Kell (2000) believes that Australian sport has a long way to go tobe a culture that is inclusive and celebrates diversity.

In addition, McPherson et al (1989) argue that the meaning of sport in any givensociety is influenced by the economic and political conditions, and the espousedvalue of that society. Hence, over time, the values, purpose and meaning of sportmay change significantly. Hill (2002) agrees that the concept of sport has changedas historical circumstances have changed and that, culturally, sport is experiencedin different ways. In the British experience, like Kell (2000) in the Australian,he asserts that sport has usually been bound up with social class and gender,and has therefore been an arena in which complex social relations and statusare generated.



27

In seeking to add a further dimension of critical analysis to the understanding ofsport, Coakley (2003) offers an alternative to defining sports in the traditional way.The use of the pluralised term ‘sports’ in contrast to the singular term ‘sport’ is thefirst indication that he is thinking differently. He argues that a definition of sportcan be found through asking two questions:

1. What activities are identified as sports by people in a particular groupor society?

2. Whose sports count the most in a group or society when it comes toobtaining support and resources?

This grounded way of finding a definition acknowledges that not everyone has thesame view of sport, and that those ideas vary over time and place. It is a method thatalso acknowledges cultural and political differences, and that there will inevitably bestruggles over whose ideas count as more important. Therefore, similar to thedefinition of civic engagement, the act of defining ‘sports’ is itself a contested activity.

Sports and civic engagementThere is some existing research that has sought to make connections between civicengagement and sports, much of which has in the past been inconclusive. Theconnections in recent literature represent a range of indicators of civic engagementemanating from the diversity of definitions across a broad social and politicalspectrum. There are some factors that appear to make a stronger suggestion of theconnection between sports and civic engagement, which are summarised below.Further connections made in the literature will be explored later, alongside theauthor’s own research with young males.

The first point that emerges is that participation in sport seems to increase thelikelihood of voting. Reporting on research originating in North America, wherevoting is voluntary, Lopez and Moore (2006) argue that where young people aged18-25 were active participants in sport they were also more likely to be civicallyactive by enrolling to vote and then by voting in elections. Female participation rateswere higher than those for males, although there was still a significant difference forboth sexes when comparing sport participants and sport non-participants.

Clearly, the correlation between sport and opting to vote is one that would not applyto young people in countries such as Australia which have compulsory voting.Other factors, though, may overlap. Lopez and Moore (2006) indicate thatparticipation in sports increases news attentiveness. They found that young peoplewho participated in sports also reported watching the news more closely, includingsports news (obviously) but also general news and political news. On thisdimension, rates were higher for males than females. Outside of North America,MM (2005) relates New Zealand research which suggests that physically activeadults (in comparison to more sedentary adults) are more likely to participate in‘passive’ civic activities such as reading the newspaper.



28

Lopez & Moore (2006) make one further point that participation in sport increasesthe likelihood of making statements in public meetings. Defined as a ‘voiceindicator’ of civic engagement, females again rated more highly than males,although male sports participants still rated higher than non-participants. Whilstsports participating females were more likely to enter into some form of boycott,this indicator did not differ significantly for males.

There is undoubtedly a connection between civic participation, social capital andpublic health (e.g. Zeirsch and Baum, 2004; Hyppä and Mäki, 2003; Baum, Palmer,Modra, Murray and Bush, 2000). Whilst other research explores the connectionbetween sports and individual physical health, some literature seeks to broaden thisrelationship in order to establish a connection between sports and public health.The World Health Organisation (WHO, 2003) initially contends that ‘physicalactivity is, for an individual, a strong means of prevention of diseases, and fornations a cost-effective method to improve public health across the population’(2003, p1). They point to research that suggests physical activity leads to economicbenefits such as reduced health care costs, increased productivity, and healthierphysical and social environments.

Interestingly, Fensham and Gardner (2005) draw out some of these benefits inrelation to dance. They argue that dance enables a person to engage ‘of and withtheir bodies in all of their lived social, physical, spatio-temporal, aesthetic andotherworldly dimensions’ (2005, p15). Dance classes are, they say, environments inwhich social skills can be learned and social capital developed, and which providebenefits that exceed economic considerations. In this way they represent uniquecommunity capacity building opportunities.

Townsend, Moore and Mahoney (2002) explore the contribution of sport to publichealth in relation to small rural communities in Australia. They support the idea thatsporting clubs and organisations provided additional health benefits in the form ofincreased social capital. With declining populations in rural communities, they arguethat sporting clubs have become one of the last vestiges of social infrastructure.Whilst banks and other institutions have been closing down, sporting clubs are oneof the few institutions still active in small rural communities and as such providefocus for identity, purpose, community cohesion, and economic boosts to thetownships. They are perceived to be essential for town and community survival.They also found that sports participation (player and non-player) was a key part ofthe physical, mental and social health and well-being of individuals and thecommunity as a whole. However, Baills and Rossi (2005) found that rural townsunfortunately have a diminishing capacity to sustain sporting activities for theiryoung people, and so the public health benefits are likewise diminishing.

Another element of the relationship between sport and civic engagement relates tosportspersonship. There is an enduring cliché in western culture that ‘sport buildscharacter’, and although some literature supports this there have also been



29

corresponding arguments that sport detracts from, or is neutral in fostering certainpositive values or traits. Jones and McNamee (2000) are critical of much of theresearch mainly on the basis of methodologies that equate ‘character’ with moralreasoning as a stage of cognitive development. They say that this leaves the readerno closer to a conclusion. Joyner &Mummery (2005) agree that there are equivocalfindings just as there are equivocal beliefs throughout society, and that in fact sportcan promote immoral or unsportspersonlike behaviours just as much assportspersonlike ones. They argue that sportspersonship is comprised of fivedimensions: respect for the social conventions of the sport, respect for the rules andofficials, respect for one’s full commitment to participation, respect and concern forthe opponent, and the absence of a negative attitude to sport. They found, whencomparing sport type (i.e. team sports and individual sports), that individual sportsappear to encourage greater respect for rules and officials than do team sports,perhaps from the absence of social pressure to engage in less respectful behaviour.There were no significant differences established for the other dimensions ofsportspersonship. Secondly, they compared goal orientations referred to as task andego. Task orientation is characterised by players motivated by learning, improving,and skill mastery. Ego orientation is characterised by showing superiority,demonstrating ability (a.k.a. ‘showing off ’), and a preoccupation with winning.They found that a high task orientation combined with a low ego orientationsignificantly increased the likelihood of observable sportspersonship across alldimensions. Summarily, it could be argued that there is some synchronicitybetween sportspersonship and certain dimensions of citizenship that relate tocivic engagement.

Given that some of the research has been inconclusive or is preliminary in itsnature, it is often difficult to establish a causal relationship between these factors. Itmay be the case that there are other factors underlying sports participation that alsoprecipitate these dimensions of civic engagement. This is one of the questions thathas prompted the author’s research of the connections between young males, sportsand civic engagement in the Australian context.

Sports and belongingThere is a potpourri of literature that addresses issues related to the notion of‘belonging’ and its connection with sport. Canada25 (2005) suggests that ‘civicengagement allows individuals to achieve a sense of belonging by contributing totheir community’ (2005, p19). Engagement in play and expression is one of theireight acknowledged modes of civic engagement by which to achieve this. Hall andBanno (2001) found that public performances of sport and physical activityincreased in young males a sense of belonging, where participants expressed feelinggood about being publicly acknowledged and recognised by adults and peers fromtheir local community. Elsewhere, there is strong affirmation about the role of sportin improving social cohesion and building social capital.



30

Putnam (2000) defines communities that are rich in social capital as those in whichthere are strong community networks, a sense of local identity/solidarity, andreportedly high levels of interpersonal trust. Coalter, Allison and Taylor (2000)logically argue, given that 33% of British people were involved in sports in someway, that sports therefore have great potential to facilitate such social participation.For young people in Australia, the argument that sports provide strong communitynetworks and civic infrastructure is even stronger, as the Australian Bureau ofStatistics (2004) estimated that 39% of young people aged 15 to 24 reported thatthey were involved in organised sport and physical activity. Additionally, asmentioned previously, Baills and Rossi (2004) and Townsend et al (2002) showedhow sport is integral to local identity, solidarity and interdependence. According toPutnam’s definition, then, sport is clearly a factor in developing communities richin social capital.

Additionally, according to the different types of social capital outlined by Ruston(2003), sport plays a role in bonding, bridging and linking. Ruston adopts theoutcomes of the UK 2000 Time Use Survey to identify social capital activities asvolunteering (formal participation), helping (informal involvement) and socialising(informal sociability). He found that people who volunteer, help or socialise spendmore time than the general population with others in the community. This clearlyvaried with age but for males, this was more evident on the weekends, where socialor recreational clubs were a significant location for volunteering. In Canada, 21%of organisations for which people volunteered were sport/recreation related(Sport Canada, 2005). In the Australian situation, Volunteering Australia (2004)reports that 34% of organisations for which people volunteered weresport/recreation related.

Sport Canada (2005) also supports the argument that sport builds social cohesionand social capital. They assert that sport participants experience a high degree ofinteraction with others which improves relationships, builds trust and teamworkskills that fosters social capital. Notwithstanding some of the negative social featuresassociated with sport (e.g. unsportspersonlike behaviour by parents, drug use,unfair judging and poor conduct by high profile athletes), they argue thatcommunity-based sport programs build social capital by providing opportunitiesfor volunteering; reinforcing relationships within families, neighbourhoods andacross communities; establishing partnerships and networks between organisations;and strengthening relationships between various levels of government.

This is further supported by Lawson (2005) who argues that sport, exercise andphysical education programs can make ‘contributions to sustainable and integratedsocial and economic development’ (2005, p138). This is achieved by producing andreinforcing social networks, contributing to the development of collectiveidentities, creating health-enhancing environments, improving well-being, andcontributing to human capital development. There are of course barriers toachieving this but he proposes that the potential of sport to meet these ends is


maximised in collaboration with helping professionals and when linked toempowerment-oriented community development.

Young males interviewed as part of the author’s doctoral research indicated thatsocial networks were a vital part of sport, which underscores these arguments. Fez,a volleyball player, reported that these social networks, while there was someoverlap with other areas of his life, could mostly be attributed to his participationin sport.

‘What’s cool about sport is the mateship, camaraderie, positive team dynamics, helpingyour team mates improve, and then social things, commonalities and connecting forother things you might need (like help with study, or going to 21sts)’.

Milo, also into volleyball, then described the importance of connection and of placeto his sense of belonging.

‘Place is an important thing in sport – the geographic area. For volleyball it was theclosest venue to where we lived but people came from everywhere. My idea ofcommunity is about place, and about the people – commonalities and socialrelationships rather than locality. I like to think everyone could be involved in sport.’

There are clear links between sport and a sense of belonging for sports participants.Further to understanding this role of sport, though, is how it addresses socialexclusion across socio-economic and cultural boundaries. Coalter et al (2000)outline many of the social benefits of sport, but are not convinced of the capacity ofsport in itself to reach marginalised or excluded young people, or in reducing youthcrime. They argue that sport will be effective in this regard when it is part of abroader community development approach to diversion. Like Hall and Banno(2001), Morris, Sallybanks, Willis and Makkai (2004) found that sports programshave had a social control function in reducing the ‘anti-social’ behaviour ofmarginalised young people, although they propose that this may have been becausethey were activities that reduced boredom and reduced the amount of unsupervisedleisure time, so that any activity that did this for young males would achieve thesame end. However, Donnelly and Coakley (2002) believe that sport must lookfurther than simple social control based initiatives. Sport and recreation maypromote social inclusion, they say, if key issues are addressed such as accessibility,democratised participation, individual competence, continuity of programs,integration of youth from different backgrounds, and the development of sincereleaders and mentors.

Despite the potential of sport to address social exclusion, in actuality McKay (1990)found that Australian sport manifested the same social inequalities across class,gender and race that characterise other social institutions, which supports Kell’s(2000) argument that Australian sport being egalitarian is a myth. Similarly, Bryant(2001) found mixed results about sport development programs in the U.K. He


31


found that traditional programs that provided ‘tasters’ and then identify participantswho can ‘go further’ actually tend to further marginalise socially excluded youngpeople. Sport Canada (2005) reports on research that sport and recreation servicesmay help marginalised young people to reintegrate, provided that services are notisolated measures and that young people have input into the nature and provisionof these services. They refer to various community based projects in France andScotland which have shown how sport can help integrate young people fromcultural minorities or asylum seeking families into the host society. These findingslead to a somewhat contradictory position in relation to the role of sport inaddressing social exclusion. Therefore, despite the actual and potential range ofphysical, emotional, social, economic, political and other benefits of sport andphysical activity, it seems that there is still a trend that sport maintains socialexclusion in the broader sense of the term.

Sports and contributionBelonging and contribution are closely connected, and there are many forms ofcontribution to community. Volunteering is one form. As already mentioned, sportand recreation organisations are the most common venues in which volunteeringtakes place across a number of different countries. It is fairly well established thatparticipation in sport correlates with the likelihood of volunteering. Lopez &Moore(2006) found that young male sports participants were significantly more likely tovolunteer, either as a one-off or on a regular basis, than sports non-participants.Eley and Kirk (2002) researched young volunteers in fixed-term sporting programsand found that their volunteer involvement stimulated a desire to volunteer againin the future. They do point out, though, that volunteering activities were morecommon amongst young people from a higher socio-economic class, or thosewhose parents had a volunteering history. Sport Canada (2005) emphasises the keyrole that sport plays in both being a venue for and a path toward volunteering. Theysay that for youth, recreation and sports facilities are places to learn about beingactive participants in the life of the community. Calloway (2004) argues that youthsport offers ‘a strategy for creating communities of achievement in which youngpeople are active and valued contributors’ (Calloway, 2004, p36). He found thatcontribution was defined in three different ways. Firstly by being partners indesigning and delivering programs, activities and services; secondly, by accessingtraining and skill development; and thirdly, by developing relationships withsupportive adult mentors.

In relation to other forms of community contribution, the connections aresomewhat hazier. For example, Lopez and Moore (2006) found no significantdifferences between sports participants and non-participants across a range ofmeasures including whether they had worked to solve a community problem,joined a run/walk/ride to raise funds, participated in a town meeting or written aletter. Morris et al (2004) are non-specific about whether it is sport that reduces


32



33

anti-social behaviour or whether the effect is related to any activity that simplyreduces boredom and the amount of unsupervised time that marginalised youngpeople have at their disposal. On the other hand, Hall and Banno (2001) reportedthat young males believed that simply playing sport for their local team was animportant aspect of contributing to their community. They found that publicperformance of activities such as dance (for young females) and rugby (for youngmales) were effective means for young people to feel a sense of belonging to theircommunity – by contributing to the vibrant life of the community and for the adultcommunity to recognise this contribution. They also found that young maleskateboarders in the area were highly motivated to participate in processes anddecisions relating to the development of a skate park, not just for their own benefit,but because it would be ‘good for the community’. That they continued theirinvolvement despite the skate park being built outside of their area of residence wastestament to this.

Whilst not referring to the connection to sports, Saggers, Palmerm, Royce, Wilsonand Charlton (2004) point out that active youth participation in at the policy level inthe Youth Sector, is mostly a method to improve services and outcomes for youngpeople. They warn that it is a contested notion, where some believe the participatoryprocess is overtaken by school leaders, or where there is a hidden agenda to creategood citizens. Others believe that at a local government level, there is an element ofsocial control or even window dressing when consulting with young people. Anagency’s commitment to full and democratic participation in committee processes isoften at odds with the way young people themselves wish to participate, or how theysee that they already participating especially in regards to sport.

Young males interviewed as part of the author’s research indicated a number ofdifferent forms of contribution. Quite of few felt that playing for a local sportingclub was itself their means of contributing to their community’s pride and goodfeeling, and their contribution to their club in terms of fundraising, recruitmentand coaching juniors was a given. Others, such as, Jiminy, who played soccer as ajunior, spoke about how sport lets the participant represent their community, andhow that community celebrates them.

‘As a kid I played soccer, where as a game it’s played all around the world andbreaches language/culture, it brings people together. As a junior it’s a family thing –family/friends cheering you on, but then as a rep you travel and represent your area.’

Milo also reported that what participants learn in sport enables them to contributeto society in other ways, which could be practical or could be a changed attitudeor rationale.

‘Participating in sport has given me skills for being able to apply in other parts of life, liketolerance, competitiveness – which means ‘improving your own game’, it’s a mind set.Participating in community life means living life and being part of things for a reason.’



34

Finally, Pug, a rugby player, spoke of the impact of sport on career choices. It wasin fact, Pug’s frustration with the limitations of recreational programs thatmotivated him to change his career path.

“I worked in Sport & Rec but I got sick of seeing disadvantaged kids just givenrecreational programs, so I decided to do Welfare/Youth Work to try and make a bit of adifference in their lives.”

These examples support the arguments that sports forms the basis for a variety ofways for young males to contribute to their community. They allude to both theintellectual/emotional and practical axes of civic engagement. As can be seen, asense of belonging and a sense of contribution are two important factors emergingin the connections between sport and civic engagement. The motivation to createchange and make a difference, as alluded to by Pug, leads to the final area ofdiscussion, which explores the possibility that sport is a pathway to activism,political engagement and resistance.

Sports and resistanceNumerous authors (e.g. Pringle, 2005; Coakley, 2003; Light and Kirk, 2000; Rowe,1995; McPherson et al, 1989; ) warn that it is important to acknowledge that theState has been involved in sport as a tool to reinforcing the status quo. At times theyhave used sport to develop, maintain and reinforce conservative or patriotic values orto reproduce conservative traits related to citizenship. The role of the media inperpetuating this can not be underestimated either. This is a relevant dimension ofthe nature of civic engagement and can not be overlooked. Hughson (2000) arguesthat this criticism applies not just to governments but also to corporate and sportingadministrative bodies. Alternatively, other authors (e.g. McKay, 1990; Kell, 2000;Grainger, 2006) show how sport is an arena that reflects the social structure of thetime with all its inequities. Despite these criticisms, sport can also be, and has beenshown to be, a forum and a pathway for political activism and resistance.

McPherson et al (1989) talk of resistance both within sport and beyond sport towider society. They point out that vying interest groups within a sport can strive tochange the status quo of their chosen field. In terms of the effects of resistancebeyond sport, they show among other things how sport subcultures emerge due todisaffection with organised social or sporting systems. Surfing, for example, hasdeveloped its own subculture that leans more toward an alternative lifestyle becauseit is seen by many surfers as a lifestyle rather than a sport, despite its growingpopularity and corporatisation. A pursuit such as skateboarding has to some extentdeveloped in a similar way. However, they argue that this has had little consequenceto the wider society. What has made a strong contribution to social transformationhas been more related to African American and female athletes, who have crossedrace and gender lines to compete in sports traditionally thought of as white or male.The implication of this has been that sport has become an avenue of mobility whichin some ways has redressed entrenched inequities and discriminatory attitudes.



35

Rowe (1995) agrees and adds homosexuality as a factor in sport effecting certainforms of social change. The same process may have been at work in the workingclass backlash against Rugby in England and Australia that resulted in the formationof Rugby League. Hill (2002) certainly sees class as a factor but argues moreconvincingly that sport and politics are overlapping more in contemporary culturemore because of the growing commercialisation of sport and a preoccupation withthe standard of performance of elite athletes in national and international events.Globalisation and the media has unfortunately, according to Rowe (1998), silencedmany of the critical and resistant voices as ‘sports audiences have grownexponentially, and sport-based nationalism has found new, ideologically fertile sites’(1998, p244). Because of these Rowe actually issues a call to sports sociologists tointentionally promote social justice within their field.

The connection between sport and political engagement specifically for youngmales is a more difficult angle of which to make sense. Initially this is becauseresearch indicates that it is young women who are more likely to be social activists.In Eden and Roker’s (2002) longitudinal study of youth social actors in the U.K.,they found that young males were significantly under-represented in beinginvolved in social action. Similarly across Lopez and Moore’s (2006) categories ofcivic engagement it was found that while young female sports participants weremore likely than female non-participants to boycott a product or service, there wereno significant differences for young males. In terms of signing petitions, neithergender of sports participants showed a significant difference over non-participants.Nevertheless, Canada25 (2005) lists ‘political engagement’ and ‘social activism’ askey modes of civic engagement alongside ‘play’ to develop in young people.

Donovan, Bowler, Hanneman and Karp (2004) report on research conducted inNew Zealand, where membership of sporting groups approaches 47% of thepopulation. They surveyed people who belonged to a variety of social groups(cultural, community, church, hobbies, sports and youth groups) and found cleardifferences in how social groups are associated with active (e.g. wrote to newspaper,called talkback radio, worked on a campaign, joined a protest rally) and passive (e.g.signed petition, discussed politics, voted, boycotted) dimensions of politicalengagement. Sports groups were associated with higher levels of passive engagementbut not active engagement. They argue that because of the sheer numbers of peopleinvolved in sporting groups across the nation, the political effect is twice that ofidentifying as working class, and rivals the magnitude of effects of gender and Maoriidentity as factors in political engagement. However, there was a less significantcorrelation between these factors when it came to young people and males.

It is difficult to say how much the New Zealand research could translate to theAustralian context, given that there is no parallel research. However, it would bereasonable to assume because of their proximity, shared passion for sport and othersimilarities, that the findings could to some extent be transferable. Young Australian



36

males interviewed as part of the author’s research indicated a definite willingness tobe part of creating a better world, although the method of making a difference orachieving social change varied. For some, there was a definite political ideationarising from their involvement in sports but with a view to taking action later in life.Sonny, an amateur boxer, had very clear ideals about fitness, nutrition and thenature of the education and economic systems.

‘It’s very important for kids to get involved in team sport… if the community couldbring out everyone to do team sports but highlight the nutritional facts as well. At theschool canteen, you can but a sandwich and water for six dollars but a pie and coke forthree. Marketing, prices, food and they’re trying to make us healthier but you don’t seethe healthy snacks dropping down …we need communities working together to showwe care. If I get my business going really good, I feel that in five years the more you’reout helping people the more you can say your stuff…’

Others spoke of their desires to create change having their roots in understandingthe difficult teenage experiences of their team mates. Pedro, in reflecting on why hehas studied community work and hopes to join the police service, said

‘I’ve got a couple of team-mates now that back then were alright but they’ve gotteninto drugs and they started heading down, so even if you can help a couple of kids it’sbetter than nothing.’

Pug, mentioned earlier, in order to make a difference for the disadvantaged youngpeople he worked with, also chose to pursue a career in welfare instead of sport.‘Rowdy’, on the other hand, saw a career in Physical Education as the opportunityto create change by influencing a new generation of young people.

‘The world is pretty fucked but we’ve got a chance to make it better – (because we’regoing to be) P.E. teachers!’

Alternatively, Milo had a more symbiotic approach to sport and social change,showing how they have both influenced each other in his life.

‘Participating in community life means living life and being part of things for a reason.My interest in social work came from being a people person, liking to help people andhearing from other people doing social work. My sense of fairness and fair play comesfrom personal values and the values of sport. You can spot a sore loser.’

These examples show some of the diversity of activism that young Australian maleshave pursued through sport. Clearly, sport as a component of contemporarywestern culture does provide a basis for both the reflection and reinforcement ofsocial structures. However, as can also be seen from the literature and originalresearch there are sufficient examples to point to the way that sport is a forumfor, and a pathway to, political engagement and resistance as a dimension ofcivic engagement.


ConclusionThe existence of somewhat contradictory research about the role of sport in civicengagement for young males should not be surprising, given the diversity ofdefinitions and political and ideological underpinnings of both sport and civicengagement. Despite their being some uncertainty about whether it is sport itself orsome pre-existing factors and traits in the individual that lead to civic engagement,it is demonstrable through existing literature and the author’s emerging researchthat sports are a predictive factor in many dimensions of civic engagement. It can beargued that sports participation for young males increases the likelihood of voting(in countries where voting is voluntary), regularly volunteering and speaking inpublic meetings. There are clear links between sport, public health and social capitalparticularly in terms of social networks and community identity. A sense ofbelonging and a sense of contribution to community are seemingly achievedthrough sport. Whilst the problem still remains that sport does not seem toadequately address inequity and social exclusion, there is still supportive evidencedespite the obstacles for sport being a forum and pathway for political engagement,social activism and resistance.

For young males in western culture progressing to a place of being more civicallyengaged, and making the transition to adulthood where that transition is celebratedby their community in such a way that it strengthens both the young person andthe community, it is important that sport play a significant role in this process.

BIBLIOGRAPHYAshutosh, V., 1997, ‘Postmodernism, civic engagement, and ethnic conflict: A passage to India’.Comparative Politics, New Brunswick: Oct 1997. Vol. 30, Iss. 1, pp1-20.

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2004, Survey of Involvement in Sport and Physical Activity.

Baills, C., and Rossi, T., 2005, ‘Child and youth sport in rurally remote regions of Australia: the viewsof a north Queensland community’, Australia Healthy Lifestyles Journal, vol 52, 3-4: 12-16.

Baum, F., Palmer, C., Modra, C., Murray, C., and Bush, R., 2000, ‘Families, social capital and health’, inWinter, I., (ed), Social Capital and Public Policy in Australia, Institute for Family Studies, Melbourne.

Blunkett, D., 2003, Respect and Responsibility – Taking a Stand against Anti-social Behaviour,UKHome OfficeWhite Paper.

Bryant, P., 2001, Social exclusion and sport: the role of training and learning, Sprito TCL, Sport England.

Burgess, I., Edwards, A., and Skinner, J., 2003, ‘Football Culture in an Australian School Setting: Theconstruction of Masculine Identity’, Sport, Education and Society, Vol 8, No 2, pp 199-212.

Burstyn, V., 1999, The Rites of Men: Manhood, Politics, and the Culture of Sport. Toronto; Buffalo, NY:University of Toronto Press.

Calloway, J., 2004, ‘Leave no child behind. Recreation and sports: Instruments for world peace’, YouthStudies Australia, Vol 23, No 1, pp 35-41.

Canada25 National Organising Committee, 2005, How can Canada develop the most engaged citizens in theworld? Canada25 Content Management Guide June 2005.


37


Carrington, B., 1998, ‘Sport, masculinity and black cultural resistance’, Journal of Sport & Social Issues, Vol22, No 3, pp275-298.

Coakley, J., 2003, Sport in society: issues and controversies, 8th ed,McGraw Hill Education (Asia)

Coalter, F., Allison, M., and Taylor, J., 2000, The Social Benefits of Sport. Edinburgh: Scottish OfficeCentral Research Unit.

Donnelly, P. & Coakley, J. (2002) The Role of Recreation in Promoting Social Inclusion,www.ccsd.ca/subsites/inclusion/bp/pd.htm (accessed 8/8/06).

Donovan, T., Bowler, S., Hanneman, R., and Karp, J., 2004, ‘Research Note: Social Groups, Sport andPolitical Engagement in New Zealand’, Australian Journal of Political Science, Vol 39, No 2, July, pp405-419.

Dudley, R. L., and Gitelson, A. R., “Civic Education, Civic Engagement, and Youth CivicDevelopment.” PS, Political Science & Politics, 36(2): 263.

Eden, K., and Roker, D., 2002, Doing Something: Young people as social actors, The National Youth Agency,Leicester, UK.

Eley, D., and Kirk, D., 2002, ‘Developing citizenship through sport: the impact of a sport-basedvolunteer programme on young sport leaders’, Sport, education and society, 7(2), Oct 2002, 151-166.

Giddens, A., 1998, The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Grainger, A., 2006, ‘From immigrant to overstayer. Samoan identity, rugby, and cultural politics of raceand nation in Aotearoa/New Zealand’, Journal of Sport & Social Issues, Vol 30, No 1, pp45-61.

Hall, N., 2004, ‘Safety in Numbers.’ Young people’s perspectives on community safety in a suburbancontext, Scottish Youth Issues Journal, Issue No 8, Summer 2004.

Hall, N., & Banno, J., 2001, Safety in Numbers. The Final Report of the St Clair and Erskine Park Youth andCommunity Safety (SCEPtiCS) Research Project, University of Western Sydney

Hall, N., and Mason, J., 2000, So Close, So Far Away. The Research Report of the Wollondilly Youth NeedsAnalysis, University of Western Sydney

Henderson, P. et al, 1998, ‘Signposts to Local Democracy’ in Local Government, Communitarianism andCommunity Development, Community Development Foundation, Warwick, UK.

Hill, J., 2002, Sport, Leisure and Culture in Twentieth-Century Britain, Houndmills Basingstoke, Palgrave.

Hughson, J., 2000, ‘The boys are back in town. Soccer support and the social reproduction ofmasculinity’, Journal of Sport & Social Issues, Vol 24, No1, pp8-23

Hyppä, M.T., and Mäki, J., 2003, ‘Social participation and health in a community rich in stock of socialcapital’, Health Education Research, Vol 18, No 6, pp770-779.

Jeffs, T., 2001, ‘Citizenship Youth Work and Democratic Renewal’, Scottish Youth Issues Journal, Issue no3, Autumn 2001, pp11-34.

Jones, C., and McNamee, M., 2000, ‘Moral reasoning, moral action and the moral atmosphere of sport’,Sport, Education and Society, Vol 5, No 2, pp131-146.

Joyner, K., and Mummery, K., 2005, “Influences on sportspersonship orientations”, Youth StudiesAustralia, Vol 24, No 1.

Kell, P., 2000, Good sports: Australian sport and the myth of the fair go. Sydney: Pluto Press

Kirlin, J., & Kirlin, M., 2002, ‘Strengthening effective government—citizen connections through greatercivic engagement’ Public Administration Review: Special Issue,Washington: Sep 2002. Vol. 62, p80-85 (6 pp.)

Lawson, H.A., 2005, ‘Empowering people, facilitating community development, and contributing tosustainable development: the social work of sport, exercise, and physical education programs‘, Sport,Education and Society, Vol 10, No 1, March 2005, pp 135-160

Light, R., and Kirk, D., 2000, ‘High school Rugby, the body and the reproduction of hegemonicmasculinity’, Sport, Education and Society, Vol 5, No 2, pp163-176.


38



39

Lopez, M., and Moore, K., 2006, Participation in Sports and Civic Engagement, The Centre forInformation and Research on Civic Learning & Engagement (CIRCLE), Canada.

Matthews F., 2000, Working with young people to strengthen communities, NSW Premiers DepartmentWorkshop.

McKay, J., 1990, ‘Sport, leisure and social inequality in Australia’, in Rowe, D., & Lawrence, G. (eds.),1990, Sport and leisure: trends in Australian popular culture. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

McPherson, B.D., Curtis, J.E., & Loy, J.W., 1989, The social significance of sport: An introduction to the sociologyof sport. Champaign, Illinois: Human Kinetics Books.

MM, 2005, ‘At the heart: how culture and recreation intersect’, Presentation to NZRA Conference 14November 2005.

Morris, L., Sallybanks, J., Willis K, andMakkai, T., 2004, ‘Sport, physical activity and antisocial behaviourin youth’, Youth Studies Australia, Vol 23, No 1, pp47-52.

Ostrander, S., 2004, ‘Democracy, Civic Participation, and the University: A Comparative Study of CivicEngagement on Five Campuses’,Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly San Francisco: Mar 2004. Vol. 33,Iss. 1, p74-93

Panelli R., Nairn K., Atwool N., and McCormack J., 2002, ‘Hanging Out: Print media constructions ofyoung people in public space’, Childrenz Issues, Journal of the Children’s Issues Centre, Vol 6, No 1,University of Otago, New Zealand.

Pattie, C., Seyd, P., & Whiteley, P., 2003, ‘Citizenship and civic engagement: Attitudes and behaviour inBritain’, Political Studies, Guildford: Oct 2003. Vol. 51, Iss. 3, p443-468 (28 pp.)

Pease, R., 2003, ‘Men and Masculinities: Profeminist approaches to changing men’, in Allan, J., Pease,R. and Briskman, L., (eds), 2003, Critical Social Work. An Introduction to Theories and Practices, Allen andUnwin: Sydney.

Pringle, R., 2005, ‘Masculinities, sport and power. A critical comparison of Gramscian and Foucauldianinspired theoretical tools’, Journal of Sport & Social Issues, Vol 29, No 3, 9256-278.

Putnam, R.D., 2000, Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of the American Community. New York:Simon and Schuster.

Rowe, D., 1998, ‘Rethinking power and resistance in sport’, Journal of Sport & Social Issues, Vol 22, No 3,pp241-251.

Rowe, D., 1995, Popular Cultures. Rock music, Sport and the Politics of Pleasure, Sage Publications.

Ruston, D., 2003, Volunteers, helpers and socialisers: social capital and time use, Social Analysis and ReportingDivision, Office for National Statistics, UK.

Saggers, S., Palmerm, D., Royce, P., Wilson, L., and Charlton, A., 2004, Alive and Motivated: Young people,participation and local government, National Youth Affairs Research Scheme, Australian GovernmentDepartment of Family and Community Services.

Seyfang, G., 2003, ‘Growing cohesive communities one favour at a time: Social exclusion, activecitizenship and time banks’, International Journal Of Urban And Regional Research, London: Sep 2003. Vol.27, Iss. 3, p699-706 (8 pp.)

Shomina, Y., Kolossov, V., & Shukhat, V., 2002, ‘Local activism and the prospects for civil society inMoscow’. Eurasian Geography And Economics, Palm Beach: Apr/May 2002. Vol. 43, Iss. 3, p244-270

Sport Canada, 2005, Strengthening Canada. The Socio-economic Benefits of Sport Participation in Canada —Report August 2005.

Swain, D., 2001, ‘Linking civic engagement and community improvement: A practitioner perspective onthe communities movement’, National Civic Review, New York: Winter 2001. Vol. 90, Iss. 4, p319-333

Townsend, M., Moore, J., and Mahoney, M., 2002, ‘Playing their part: the role of physical activity andsport in sustaining the health and well being of small rural communities’, Rural and Remote Health 2(online), 2002: no 109, pp1-7. Accessed 24/7/06.


Van Benschoten, E., 2000, ‘Youth-led civic organizing: Countering perceptions of apathy and redefiningcivic engagement (a conversation with Joel Spoonheim of the Active Citizens School)’, National CivicReview, New York: Winter 2000. Vol. 89, Iss. 4, p301-307

Van Gennep, 1908, Les Rites de Passage, France

Volkwein-Caplan, Karin A. E., 2004, Culture, sport, and physical activity, Oxford: Meyer & Meyer Sport

Volunteering Australia, 2004, Snapshot 2004: Volunteering Report Card.

White R, 1990, No Space of Their Own, Cambridge University Press

World Health Organisation (WHO), 2003,Health and development through physical activity and sport,Geneva,Switzerland.

Wulff, B., 2003, ‘Creating a sandlot for democracy: The Study Circles Resource Center’s approach toyouth civic engagement’. National Civic Review New York: Fall 2003. Vol. 92, Iss. 3, p12-19

Young, J., 2003, ‘Persuading students to care’. The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol 49. Iss 31, April 112003.

Ziersch, A.M., and Baum, F.E., 2004, ‘Involvement in civil society groups. Is it good for your health?’,Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, vol 58, pp493-500. Downloaded fromjech.bmjjournals.com on 30/3/06.


40

Not such a fair go: an audit of children’s and young people’s rights in Australia

NOT SUCH A FAIR GO: AN AUDIT OF CHILDREN’S ANDYOUNG PEOPLE’S RIGHTS IN AUSTRALIA

Judith Bessant

The civic status of children and young people in western societies continues to bea key site of political contest and policy development. Its significance to theinternational community has been acknowledged by the development of theUnited Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child (UNCROC) adopted in1989. Equally, as youth workers and policy makers will acknowledge, acceptance ofthe obligations to treat children and young people as full citizens has a long way stillto go. Recent passage of Charters of Rights in the UK (1999) and severaljurisdictions in Australia like Victoria (2006) can be expected to assist.

In this paper I address both the challenges and the promise of promoting humanrights for young people by engaging in an audit of aspects of Australia’s compliancewith UNCROC. The obligation to comply with UNCROC has beenacknowledged by the Australian government as a pertinent international law underthe Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Act 1986 and subsequent amendments.The Australian Government (through the Attorney General’s Department) submitsa ‘report card’ to the UN on a regular basis detailing the degree to which it believesAustralia is compliant with the UNCROC. I offer a brief assessment of the extentto which contemporary Australian law, policy and practice is compliant with thoseArticles of the United Nations Convention of the Rights of the Child whichspecifically relate to the civil rights and freedoms of children and young people.

The relevant Articles include:• Article 13 – Freedom of expression• Article 14 – Freedom of thought, conscience and religion• Article 15 – Freedom of association and peaceful assembly• Article 16 – Protection and privacy• Article 17 – Access to appropriate information,• Article 19 – Protection from abuse and neglect• Article 37 – Right to not be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman ordegrading treatment or punishment

To do this audit I review earlier reports from the Australian Government(Australian Government, 1995, 2003) to the United Nations which provides anofficial view of the extent to which Australia has complied with the Convention, aswell as the response to Australia’s reports from the UN Committee on the Rightsof the Child (UN 1997). (United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child,1997). At appropriate points I suggest where further investigation or action would


41


42 Not such a fair go: an audit of children’s and young people’s rights in Australia

assist Australia to better comply with the Convention. The point of such an exerciseis relatively straightforward. Audits of this kind help to establish an agenda forpolicy makers. To begin, two general observations are warranted. One is a technicalobservation, the other more substantive.

Before providing this assessment there is value in acknowledging that rights talk hasmade its way back on to the political agenda in recent years in ways that have gonebeyond the more traditional and restricted accounts of rights. Indeed the languageof rights has broadened to include concepts such as inclusion, citizenship and youthparticipation (John 2003, pp195-251; Matthews et.al, 1998-99, pp62:16-31;Matthews et.al, 2000, pp299-310; Jones and Wallace 1992, Bessant 2003, pp87-100).One benefit of this has been that rights are now being picked up on domestic level– through for example national, state and local governments acting in ways that aresometimes inclusive of young people.

It is also important to acknowledge that rights talk raises a complexity of issueswhich include contradictory rights as well as conflicts over how rights connect toobligations and duties such as fiduciary duties (Campbell, 2006, pp24-27). Asmentioned above the discussion here is restricted to civil rights which includenegative and positive rights or legal and moral entitlements to as well as protectionfrom actions or things. The rights referred to here protect the human agency of allthose who are identified as citizens within a nation state. They are distinct fromhuman rights which are not bound by nationhood and belong to all peoplerecognized as human. Civil rights are important if we serious about consideringourselves a democratic and civilized society. They are critical also if we are seriousabout ensuring young peoples well-being and to make sure they have theopportunity to develop in all the ways they can. This rests on there being a socialcontext in which young people can exercise their human agency. Moreover, civilrights also impose restrictions and obligations on some people to secure the rightsof others, and in doing so provide guidelines for securing ethical relations betweenolder and young people.

The issue of rights – particularly when applied to children and young people haslong been a controversial and complex matter, so much so that the USA andSomalia refused to sign the UNCROC. The concern for the USA was that itconflicted with or undermined the rights of the parents. And, beyond the issue ofconflicting rights, child and youth rights have been controversial for reasons thatrelate to a reluctance on the part of some, to acknowledge young peoples moral andlegal status as fully-fledged human beings. Other controversies are grounded in therequirement on the part of some (ie., the state) to relinquish power of others.

Implementing young peoples rights through judicial means is another controversialmatter because it requires changes to domestic law and the enforcement of thoselaws (Fortin, 2003). Given that we have had limited progress in securing the rights


43Not such a fair go: an audit of children’s and young people’s rights in Australia

of young people by enacting or amending domestic laws, the UN remains animportant, but although not exclusive means for making formal complaints againstgovernments for the violation of rights (Gerschutz and Karns, 2005, pp31-51).

Although the UNCROC has been officially recognized by the Australiangovernment as a pertinent international law, that does not mean it is an effectivelegal instrument. A key limitation is that in spite of the recognition accorded thisinternational convention, such recognition does not entail or require legal oradministrative decisions to be made in ways that comply with the stipulations ofthat international law. An additional and serious obstacle to the implementation ofthe Convention is the absence of any right, enforceable in law that gives Australiancitizens the ability to make complaints in Australian courts to test whether a breachof the Convention on the Rights of the Child has occurred. (This problem was notaddressed by the new Victorian Charter of Rights implemented in 2007)

The more substantive consideration is this. Although UNCROC specifies a seriesof civic rights and freedoms – outlined below – these are frequently very narrowlyconceived. In particular they are drafted in such a fashion as to pass over the factthat legally Australia’s children and young people exist in what the Italian socialtheorist Georgio Agamben calls a ‘state of legal exception’ (Agamben, 2005).

By a ‘state of exception’ Agamben refers to a situation where a given legal system ora constitutional government lawfully suspends either the rule of law or a range offundamental rights or liberties – typically and historically because a state ofemergency is presumed to exist.

The ‘state of exceptionality’ in which children and young people are typically placeddepends not on some state of emergency, but rather relies on the basic propositionthat they are not full citizens by reason of immaturity irrationality or cognitive orethical incompetence. To this is then added certain long-standing and popularbeliefs for example that they are a danger to themselves and others. In consequencethey are not entitled to the ‘normal’ range of rights and liberties adults take forgranted. In this way children and young people are routinely discriminated againston the basis of their age and frequently this is codified in law. This happened forexample when the Federal government suspended the operation of anti-discrimination legislation in 2000 rendering it lawful for employers to discriminateagainst young people enabling employers to pay young employees a youthspecific wage. The historical parallels with the treatment of indigenous people,women and property-less workers likewise deemed to lack the fundamentalcriteria rendering them eligible as citizens are obvious. As I suggest below thereare many striking instances when the rule of law is simply suspended in Australiawhen it comes to recognising or protecting the fundamental rights of children andyoung people.

Freedom of ExpressionArticle 13 – Freedom of expression

The child shall have the right to freedom of expression. This right shall includefreedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless offrontiers, either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art, or through any othermedia of the child’s choice.

The exercise of this right may be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only besuch as are provided by law and are necessary:

a. for respect of the rights and reputations of others; orb. for the protection of national security or of public order, or public health or morals.

In its last report addressing compliance with the UN Convention on the Rights ofthe Child, the Australian government indicated that it had taken a number ofinitiatives to encourage and enable children to access and use media like radio, toexpress their views on issues of interest (Australian Government 1995, 2003).

These initiatives with regard to the public sphere and the role of the media in it areto be welcomed. However there is a conspicuous silence about the issue of freedomin expression in other important institutional spaces like Australia’s schools.

Between approximately the ages of five and 16-17 all young Australians are legallyrequired to be surrendered by their parents or guardians to schools. Althoughschools offer young people many developmental rights that cannot be denied, theyare also deeply undemocratic institutions. They remain institutions where theimbalance of powers and rights between the adults acting in loco parentis and theyoung people is extreme. The mandatory and prolonged nature of schooling forexample comes with the denial of students’ rights to freedom of speech andmovement. Students rarely have the right to say how the school is run or howteachers and others adults should conduct themselves. As students young peopleare routinely denied the right to participate in decision-making that directly affectsthem such as the curriculum to which they are exposed. There is an insistence onready obedience, and a refusal to acknowledge most liberties that other citizensenjoy as a matter of course like choices about hair-styles, clothing and so forth.Students have also been exposed to the expectation that they subject themselves toviolent assault in the name of school discipline.

Over the past few years, thousands of school-aged Australians have been part of alarger section of the population who have regularly taken to the streets in protestacross Australia against racism, globalization and global warming. The responses ofpoliticians, education officials and school principals to such political activityrevealed a number of strongly-held views about the rights of young people tofreedom of expression and to engage in political action (especially during schoolhours). The comments of politicians, principals and education policy makers, and





many other adults frequently reveal a deep unease over the fact that children andyoung people, not yet legally old enough to vote, had taken to the streets as part ofa political process. In 2005 Queensland Labor Premier, Peter Beattie, was onepolitician quick to condemn young people for walking out of school. Beattiewarned that an ‘extreme political party’ was responsible for organising ‘the schools’protests in Queensland and elsewhere (Courier Mail 8 August 2005). Beattie saidof the school protests: “I don’t favour it and my advice to parents would be I thinkthey should consider whether it’s appropriate that children should be out of schoolwhen they should in fact be learning’ (ibid, 25 July 2005). Concern is frequentlyexpressed about the way in which ‘extremists’ ‘manipulate’ ‘vulnerable youngpeople’ for their own purposes.

There seems to be a combination of hypocrisy, and contradictory messages evidentin popular talk about young people’s social responsibility and political engagement.On the one hand we hear frequent calls for ‘active citizenship’, greater ‘inclusion’,‘participation’ to enhance our democratic culture, improve policies and so ‘youth’can feel less ‘alienated’, and marginalized, on the other hand we hear regulatingjudgment like the above. Governments and many organisations now talk-up theneed to involve young people in decision-making processes and to encourage theirinvolvement in policy formulation through official ‘Round Table ‘initiatives’ etc, yetat the same time many politicians and policy makers disapprove of the very idea thatyoung people should engage in political action/protest.

The rights of young people to freedom of expression are frequently and easilycurtailed, and in many cases this constitutes a breach of Article 13. Redressing thiscontravention would involve action like the Commonwealth, states and territoriesgovernments developing strategies that lead to the articulation of a national code ofpolitical rights for children and young people of school age. There is a specialproblem about many religious schools.

While religious schools and indeed publicly funded religious universities aregenerally not exempt from legislation, many do apply to have the requirement thatthey conform to such legislation favoring freedom of expression suspended so thatthey may do what they do – while continuing to receive public support. Aproportion of private schools especially religious fundamentalist schools are closingdown on freedom of expression. This is achieved by constructing a narrow,prejudiced and bigoted formal and ‘hidden’ curriculum that teaches faith-basedcreationism while laying claim to being scientific when what is offered is scientism.This can be seen in the condemnation of evidentiary knowledge that is foundationalto modern scientific practice. In this way such schools and universities subvert thebasic institutional and civic norms of a modern democratic society.

Worse many religious education institutions breach anti-discrimination policy andlaw designed to secure freedom of expression by acting in ways that prejudice

applicants for employment in those organizations on grounds of religion andsexuality (ie., by being non-catholic), sexuality (ie., by not being hetero-sexual) etc.Similar discriminatory practices characterize promotion and career opportunitiesfor career development.

These institutions exist to a considerable extent because of substantial publicsupport. That the fact that this policy arrangement fails to give effect to the kind ofclear-cut separation of church and state as envisaged by the ‘Fathers’ of theAustralian Constitution is one thing; the fact that such a principle is core to anydemocratic society is another.

If Australia is to comply with the Articles 13 and 14 of the UNCROC and notbreach young peoples freedom of expression, then all states and territories need togive urgent consideration to revising the relevant education and anti-discriminationacts in ways that require that in future any receipt of public monies by privateschools be subject to the requirement that such schools do not seek exemptionfrom the relevant state or Commonwealth anti-discrimination legislation.

Freedom of Association and Peaceful AssemblyArticle 15 – Freedom of association and peaceful assembly

State Parties recognize the rights of the child to freedom of association and to freedomof peaceful assembly.

No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of these rights other than those imposedin conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in theinterest of national security or public safety, public order, the protection of public healthor morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

The Australian government argues that it complies with this Article. (AustralianGovernment, 1995, 2003). It points to a recent youth participation project inTasmania that involved the community responding to popular perceptions ofchildren’s and young people’s use of public space and notes that this will bereplicated in other parts of Australia. Mention is also made of the Commonwealth’sattempt to develop programs ‘to remedy inappropriate behavior’ in public placeswithout involving police.

The ‘United Nation Committees Concluding Observations’ expressed concernabout local legislation that allowed police to remove children and young peoplecongregating in public areas. (United Nations Convention on the Rights of theChild Committee, 1997). The Australian government has replied by maintainingthat it is legitimate to restrict children and young people’s right to associate freelyand peacefully assemble. This is because those actions are ‘designed to ensurepublic safety and order, including safety of children as well as to prevent children





from committing crimes and becoming involved in the criminal justice system’(Australian Government, 2003, p30).

Youth curfews or ‘exclusion zones’ continue to be used by local and state authoritiesin Australia to keep young people ‘off the streets’ during certain hours. This resultsnot only in a breach of young persons right to freedom of association and assembly,but also the criminalization of certain kinds of social activity.

In Queensland a refusal to move-on under s38 (1)(a) of the Police Powers andResponsibilities Act 2000 constitutes a criminal offence. Police have the power tolawfully apprehend and relocate a young person without that young person havingcommitted an offence other than being out at night. Similar practices apply in otherparts of Australia. In Perth for example the Western Australian Government’sNorthbridge Strategy 2003 applies to a specific precinct where children under 12cannot go after dark without a guardian and young people aged 13 to 15 cannot beafter 10.00pm without a guardian. More generally children and young people whopolice or Department of Community Officers consider to be misbehaving are alsodirected to move on, or they are physically removed from the area.

This practice stands as a clear breach of Article 15 of the UNCROC.

There is no legitimate basis for suspending the normal operations of the law whendealing with issues of public order. Police in all states and territories can workwithin a wide range of legislation dealing with crimes and misdemeanors and havea wide and normal set of powers of arrest to deal with criminal or minor legalinfringements if they believe an offence has been committed. These should besufficient to secure public order.

Police also have power when they believe a young person may be, or may intend to‘chrome’ or inhale what is referred to as a ‘volatile substance’ such as paint or glue.They have authority in Queensland and Victoria to confiscate any suspect good andremove the young person from a public area.

In Victoria the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances (Volatile Substances) Act2003 (Victoria) came into effect in July 2004. The law does not criminalise thepossession of volatile substances (glue spray paints, petrol etc). However, it doesgive police power to use ‘reasonable force’ to search, seize and detain a person underthe age of 18 if they are inhaling, or if police suspect they might inhale in the futureindefinitely, and can do so with no maximum period of detention set. Young peoplecan be forcibly searched and detained without having committed a criminal offence.The police have power to search a young person without a warrant and to detainthat person. This not only breaches a young person’s right to freedom of movementand assembly, it also contravenes their right not to be deprived of their libertyunlawfully and arbitrarily.



If Australia is to act in ways that respect young people’s right to freedom ofmovement and association, then the Victorian government needs to decide againstimplementing the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances (Volatile Substances)Act 2003 (Vic) when the sunset clause comes into effect.

The introduction of new laws aimed at reinforcing the national government’s anti-terrorist capacity (Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002, Anti-terrorism Act (No 2) 2004, and Anti-terrorism Act (No 3) 2004 apply to childrenand young people. They do so in ways that are not in the interests of young peopleand pose an unacceptable risk of breaching their rights including the right tofreedom of assembly and freedom of expression and the right to be free fromarbitrary arrest.

The law applies different rules to different groups of young people – depending onage. Those under the age of 16 cannot be apprehended or questioned by ASIO. For16 to 17 year olds a warrant needs to be issued if ASIO believe the personconcerned, has committed or is likely to commit a ‘’terrorist act’. A parent orguardian can be contacted and asked to attend any interrogation session, unless thatadult person is unacceptable to ASIO in which case someone who is acceptable canbe contacted to represent the young person’s interest. If the adult representative isdeemed to be ‘unduly disruptive’ then they will be asked to leave. A 16-17 year oldcan be questioned for no more than two hours at a time and a warrant allows fortheir detention for 48 hours and can be extended to seven days. It is also lawfulunder the anti-terrorist act for a 16 to 17 year old to be search as well as strip-searched. This must be done with the adult representative in the room.

Living in a country that does not have a national Bill of Rights and which has agrowing numbers of young Muslims, the introduction of these laws hasconsiderable potential to breach some young people’s rights as set out inUNCROC.

The so-called anti-terrorist legislation has been criticized for the breadth of itspowers and the vagueness of its definitions of the offences it seeks to prohibit or toregulate. There are a number of legitimate issues that relate to young people inrespect to the anti-terrorist laws. One is the ambiguity in the language in thelegislation about what constitutes a terrorist act. Secondly, we already have laws thatadequately deal with the threat of terrorism which make the new legislation isunnecessary. The potential for misuse of the new laws is too high especially foryoung Muslims (Australian Muslim Rights Advocacy Network, 2004).For Australia to act in compliance with Article 15 of UNCROC and respect youngpeople’s right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly, then the federalgovernment needs to repeal its 2004 anti-terrorist legislation. (This involvesacknowledging the authority resting in existing legislation that the governmentalready has to protect the national interest).



Protection of PrivacyArticle 16 Protection of Privacy

No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or herprivacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honourand reputation.

The child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

To demonstrate compliance with this Article the Australian government refers to itsamendment in 2001 to the Privacy Act 1988. That Act establishes a requirement formany private sector as well as public sector organisations to observe the NationalPrivacy Principles which relate to the collection of personal information includingthat of children (Australian Government, 2003, pp30-31). The Attorney Generalhas also convened an advisory group to help with a review of whether or notadditional provisions are needed for the protection of personal information forchildren. This resulted in a discussion paper. Reference is made to the NSWPrivacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 that requires public sectoragencies to make a privacy management plan that articulates how privacy principlesrelate to children (NSW Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998,p31). In Victoria, under the Children and Young Persons Act 1989, it is an offenceto reveal confidential information contained in a report that a person has access towithout consent of that person whom the report concerns.

These kinds of measures are welcome. However as is so often the case there arewidespread and ‘normal’ practices that breach Article 16 and largely go unregulated.

Any rights children and young people have to privacy are regularly undone ininstitutions such as schools. Schools share many features with militaryorganisations and prisons in regard to the abrogation of normal ideas about privacy.(School boarders and fully institutionalized children like children in care and/or injuvenile detention centres routinely have their right to privacy breached with room,bag, locker, and mail ‘inspections’ (see for example Regulation 27 of the Children(Detention Centres) Regulation 2000 (NSW), see also 23 Juvenile justiceRegulation 1993 (Qld). It has long been common practice for example for femalestudents to have their underclothes inspected to satisfy teachers that the apparel issuitable. This surveillance extends to hair, jewelry and make-up. The right toprivacy is also routinely abrogated by practices such as mandatory and surprise bagand locker inspections and more recently by the placing of surveillance cameras instudent toilets and change rooms.

To comply with the UNCROC the privacy of all children and young people needsto protected under the Federal government’s privacy legislation in the same waysthat all other Australian’s right to privacy is protected. One way of realizing this isto insert privacy requirement clauses in all funding contracts between the state and



private schools and private contractors that administer child or youth welfare andprotection institutions.

Access to Appropriate InformationArticle 17 Access to Appropriate Information

State Parties recognize the important function performed by the mass media and shallensure that the child has access to information and material from a diversity of nationaland international sources especially those aimed at the promotion of his or her social,spiritual and moral well-being and physical and mental health. To this end parties shall:

a. Encourage the mass media to disseminate information and material of social andcultural benefits to the child and in accordance with the spirit of Article 29;

b. Encourage international co-operation in the production, exchange anddissemination of such information and material from a diversity of cultural,national and international sources;

c. Encourage the production and dissemination of children’s books;d. Encourage the mass media to have particular regard for the linguistic needs of the

child who belongs to a minority group or who is indigenous;e. Encourage the development of appropriate guidelines for the protection of the child

from information and material injurious to his or her well-being, bearing in mindthe provisions of Article 13 and 18.

In ‘demonstrating’ how Australia complies with this Article, the Australiangovernment has emphasized ways that it restricts access to information using itscensorship powers (derived from section 51 of the Australian Constitution). TheAustralian government points to the authority and work of organisations like theFilm Censorship Board and the Film and Literature Review Board. It notes that aco-ordinated approach has been adopted between federal, sate and territorygovernments in respect to the classification of videotapes, and computer games(Australian government, 2003, pp31-32 and pp47-50). Further evidence ofAustralia’s compliance with this Article is said to relate to radio and the registeringof a revised Commercial Radio Code of Practice that strengthens the emphasis onthe need to avoid offensive language and limits broadcasts of explicitly sexual themeto the hours of 9.30pm and 5.00am (Australian Government, 2003, p32). Similaradvice is provided in respect to official attempts to regulate/censor on-line content(Australian Government 2003, pp23-33). It is perhaps odd that a government likethe Howard administration which has identified itself as ‘liberal’ in regard tofreedom of choice, should choose to emphasize that it is protecting the rights ofchildren and young people to access information via a regime of censorship.

Freedom of information and the Family Court

There are several institutions apart from schooling and the media where free accessto information for children and young people matters very much. One suchinstitution is the Family Court.



A young person’s access to information within the Family Court is quite restricted.So too is the degree to which a child’s or young person’s views are considered indecision-making. How this is to occur is not adequately stipulated in legal proceduresin the family court, in juvenile justice or in the care and protection systems.

Here too the right to access appropriate information connects to Articles 12 and 16and the rights of the child to express views in all matters affecting them and forthose views to be given due weight and taken into account in decision makingprocesses. As the then Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia acknowledgedin 2003: children are rarely seen in the Family Court, yet they are the primerationale for many mediation sessions. They may be legally represented at finalhearings, but a fairly constant criticism is that some child representatives do notconsider it necessary to meet with the child before so doing. Moreover, children arerarely seen by judges (Nicholson, 2003, pp3-4).

The incorporation of relevant aspects of the Convention into Australian law by theFamily Court would make a major contribution to Australia’s capacity to complywith the UNCROC. In particular I refer to the value of paying greater attention toaccessing the views of children and young people in Family Court decisions. Oneother measure that would help would be a requirement that professionals workingin the Family Court undergo pre-service and in-service training on the rights ofyoung people and children.

The Right not to be Subjected to Torture, Cruelty or DegradingTreatmentArticle 37 – Right to not be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degradingtreatment or punishment

State Parties shall ensure that:

a. No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degradingtreatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonmentwithout possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by personbelow 18 years of age

b. No child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily. Thearrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be in conformity with the lawand shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriateperiod of time;

c. Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and respect for theinherent dignity of the human person, and in a manner which takes into accountthe needs of persons of his or her age. In particular every child deprived of libertyshall be separated from adults unless it is considered in the child’s best interest notto do so and shall have the right to maintain contact with his or her familythrough correspondence and visits, save exceptional circumstances;



d. Every child deprived of his or her liberty shall have the right to prompt access tolegal and other appropriate assistance, as well as the right to challenge the legalityof the deprivation of his or her liberty before a court or other competent,independent and impartial authority, and to a prompt decision on any such action.

In 1995 the federal government explained to the UN that torture and other cruel,inhuman or degrading treatment is not tolerated in Australia and that it constitutesa criminal offence and civil wrong in all Australian jurisdictions (Australiangovernment, 2003, p62).

Corporal punishment

In 1997 the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern about alack of prohibition in legislation regarding the use of corporal punishment inschools at home and in other institutions (UN Committee on the Rights of theChild, 1997). In response the Australian government reported that corporalpunishment in Australian government schools and some non-government schoolshas been prohibited in NSW, ACT, South Australia Tasmania, Victoria and WesternAustralia (UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 1997). Physically ‘chastising’a child remains legal, although there has been a recommendation that a ‘legislativestandard of reasonableness be established and that the use of objects in such a wayas to cause or risk causing injury be prohibited (UN Committee on the Rights ofthe Child, 1997). (The absence of both Queensland and the Northern Territoryfrom that list is notable given the numbers students who continue to be subject tocorporal punishment within those jurisdictions).

In its response to the UN the Australian government explained this matter wasconsidered by the Model Criminal Code Officers Committee which reported in1998 that ‘at present it goes too far to criminalise a corrective smacking by a parentor guardian, so long as the force used is reasonable’ (UN Committee on the Rightsof the Child, 1997, p36).

Given this view Australia unfortunately continues to breach Article 37(a) by failingto protect young people’s right to freedom from cruel and degrading treatment.Young people are an exception to the normal rule of law that all other citizens andindeed residents of Australia enjoy.

For parents, or persons having custody of children it is still lawful for parents andother some acting in loco parentis to assault a child or young person if that actionis deemed to be ‘corrective’.

Despite the progress that has been made in terms of official awareness raisingefforts and the outlawing of corporal punishment in state school, the Australiangovernment has not yet addressed the concerns of the UN Committee expressedin its ‘Concluding Observation’ about the lack of prohibition on corporal

punishment in non-state schools, in the home and in other institutions (UNCommittee on the Rights of the Child, 1997). Once more it can be seen how youngpeople, unlike all other Australians, are an exception to the normal rules of law inthe sense that they are not protected by it from what is usually be described asphysical or verbal assault.

Children and young people in detention

In Australia, some children and young people are subject to mandatory detentionif they are asylum seekers or if they have committed certain offences inWestern Australia.

In Western Australia and the Northern Territory mandatory sentencing legislationwas enacted in 1996 and 1997, requiring courts to apply minimum sentences ofdetention or for people convicted of certain offences. The WA ‘the three strikesand you’re in’ ruling, applied when a person is convicted for a third time or morefor a home burglary, they must be sentenced to a minimum of 12 months detention.Fortunately the NT Sentencing Act has been amended in 2005 so that all juvenilesentencing is again at the discretion of the court.

Australia’s policy of mandatory detention of child asylum seekers in immigrationcamps clearly breaches the UNCROC on a number of accounts. It remains a‘lawful’ practice though in December 2006 the federal government announced itwas going to suspend the practice). It brings Australia uncomfortably close to whathappens when state regimes extinguish fundamental legal and constitutional rightsunderstood to constitute the rule of law. Needless to say this breaches theUNCROC not only in respect to Article 37(a) (Right not to be subject to degradingtreatment or punishment), but also Article 3 (principle of the best interests of thechild), and Article 22 (Refugee children).

Australia’s record of acting in accordance with UNCROC significantly improve ifthe federal government enacted legislation that ensured all children and youngpeople were not subject to mandatory detention, and if they ensure that all thosecurrently incarcerated under mandatory detention legislation were released andalternative arrangements put in place that were respectful of their human rights.

Police officers

As the Australian government points out, police officers are bound by the rules ofcommon law as well as professional relevance codes of conduct. Police are alsotrained in conflict management and on how to carry out their duties using minimalforce is necessary. The implication is that the training, law and codes of practice actas restraints that help prevent inappropriate police treatment of children and youngpeople. While these measures are commendable, there remains considerable roomfor improvement in respect to Australia’s record of police youth relations. Incidents





for example that took place in inner city suburb of Sydney Redfern in February2004 when a 17 year old indigenous boy was impaled on a metal fence during apolice pursuit, raise questions about police and Aboriginal youth relations.

In respect to Aboriginal deaths in custody indigenous people remain overrepresented in both the justice and welfare/protection systems, and the incidence ofdeaths in adult and juvenile detentions continue to be disproportionately high(Australian Institute of Criminology 2004, Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council2002, p3). According to the Australian Institute of Criminology, Indigenous peopleaged 10 to 17 years are still almost 20 times more likely to be in detention than non-Indigenous persons of the same age group (Australian Institute of Criminology,2004; Charlton and McCall, 2004).

The civil rights of young people as articulated under Article 37 could be protectedif a number of simple changes were to take place. This would include therequirement that police undergo pre-service and in-service training designed toimprove officers’ understandings of and professional relationship with children,young people and indigenous people. A more concerted effort on the part of policeto address the disadvantages and discrimination that many indigenous people, andparticularly indigenous young people experience would also assist.

Finally, the establishment of a national inquiry into why the high levels of deaths incustody continue would assist. It would be particularly useful if that inquiryinvestigated why indigenous children and young people continue to be overrepresented in the care and protection and justice systems.

ConclusionAs the federal government has indicated in its most recent Report (2003), Australiahas made some progress in complying with the civil rights and freedoms of childrenand young people under the UNCROC. Yet, as indicated in this paper, we stillhave a considerable way to go in terms if there is a genuine commitment to realizinga full compliance.

As mentioned above, there are a few things that need to be done if Australia isto realize the commitment it signed up to when we became signatories tothat convention.

One measure involves the treatment of children and young people that is respectfulof their dignity and abilities as complete human beings. In other words, while age-based prejudice towards young people remains widespread, there remains no goodreasons for refusing to extend the basic principles of equality of respect to youngpeople or any good reason for refusing to appreciate their abilities as completehuman beings.



A concerted effort is needed to win a popular recognition of the moral status ofchildren and young people as fully human. I refer here to the idea that a person’shumanity entitles them to be treated with dignity, and can include entitlementsidentified in the UNCROC. Recognition of a person’s moral status is the first stepin the larger task of ensuring they have the kinds of legal rights and protections thatall other sections of the population now benefit from. The possession of a full rangeof legal rights is critical if the practice of placing young people outside the normalrules of law is to discontinue, and if there is to be a change in the custom ofviolating the rights of children and young people and continuing to treat them asless than adult.

The custom of applying ‘states of exemption’ to children and young people hasbecome the rule in Australia. If we are to have progress, then this needs to berecognized as a problem and addressed.

While recognition of the moral status of children and young people is aprecondition for realizing their legal status, another way is for the CommonwealthGovernment of Australia to act to incorporate the UNCROC into domestic law inthis country.

Such a measure would certainly put Australia ‘on the map’ as a leader in securingthe rights of young people. It would also go a long way towards helping to addressthe poor human rights record Australia unfortunately has courtesy of our treatmentof asylum seekers and indigenous Australians.

BIBLIOGRAPHYAboriginal Justice Advisory Council, 2002, New South Wales Aboriginal Justice Advisory Council,Sydney, No 47, June.

Agamben, G. 1998, Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, Stanford, California: Stanford UniversityPress.

Australian Institute of Criminology, 2004, Crime facts info, No 87: Juvenile detention rates 1994-2003, AIC,Canberra.

Australian Muslim Rights Advocacy Network 2004, Terrorism and Laws: ASIO, the Police and You,Australian Muslim Rights Advocacy Network.

Bessant, J., 2003, Youth participation, a new mode of government, Policy Studies, vol.24, n.2/3, pp87-100.

Campbell, T., 2006, Rights: A Critical Introduction, Routledge, London.

Charlton, K, McCall, M, 2004, Statistics on Juvenile Detention in Australia: 1981-2003, Australian Instituteof Criminology, Canberra.

Fortin, J., 2003, Children’s Rights and the Developing Law, Lexis Nexis Butterworths, London.

Gerschutz, J., and Karns,M., 2005, Transforming Visions into Reality: The Conventions on the Rightsof the Child, in M. Ensalaco and L Majka, (eds), Children’s Human Rights: Progress and Challenges forChildren Worldwide, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Oxford, pp31-51.

Jones, G. and Wallace. C., 1992. Youth, Family and Citizenship,Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Matthews, H. and F. Tucker, 2000. ‘Consulting Children’, Journal of Geography in Higher Education 24(2):299-310.

Matthews, H. and M. Limb, and L. Harrison, M. Taylor, 1998-99. ‘Local Places and the PoliticalEngagement of Young People; youth councils as participatory structures’, Youth and Policy: The Journalof Critical analysis 62:16-31.

Nicholson, A., 2003, ‘Children and Children’s Rights in the Context of Family Law’, Law AsiaConference, Brisbane, June.

The Australian Institute of Criminology, 2002, National Deaths in Custody Program Annual Report, AIC,Canberra.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC), 1989. Adopted by the GeneralAssembly of the United Nations, 20 November.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child Committee, 1997, Concluding Observations of theCommittee on the Rights of the Child: Australia, 10/10/97, Sixteenth session, UN.



TOWARDS A PERSON-CENTRED ‘CULTURE’:THE USE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPROACHESIN THE INDEPENDENT YOUTH COUNSELLING SERVICEIN WEST BELFAST

Pat Henry, Liz McArdle, Dr. Caryl Sibbett

ABSTRACTThis paper is drawn from a qualitative study of clients’, counsellors’ and thesupervisor’s views of the value and impact of the Independent Youth CounsellingService (IYCS) in West Belfast. Data collection combined semi-structured interviews,focus groups and an open-ended questionnaire. The findings indicate the significanceof factors above and beyond the person-centred counselling experience, in maximisingthe potential for growth and development for clients and counsellors. This holisticapproach to counselling service provision employs a body of community developmentprocesses, which collectively combine to embed the counselling service in acomplementary principled approach. This paper explores how these communitydevelopment features bolster the counselling experience to promote a ‘culture’ of person-centeredness, thereby increasing the empowerment of the client.

Introduction and ContextWhile the current peace process in Northern Ireland is still stabilising and attentionis focused on political solutions, there has been an exciting growth in peopleorganising themselves through self-help projects and collaborative approaches tocollective problems. The proliferation of community-based youth work is arelatively recent but pertinent phenomenon in West Belfast (Henry, 1998). TheIndependent Youth Counselling Service (IYCS) West Belfast, founded in 1999, waspart of this wave of community activism. The service was established as a directresponse to needs identified by young people, youth workers, community workersand health professionals who sought a locally based counselling service in WestBelfast. Established initially by two graduates of a counselling Masters course fromQueen’s University Belfast, six other counsellors were recruited to the IYCS. Alleight counsellors had completed counselling Masters courses. Counsellors haveworked on a weekly basis, usually in the evenings or at weekends and seven of theeight counsellors either live or have worked in the West Belfast area. IYCS has beenlocated at the headquarters of a local umbrella organisation, the West Belfast ParentYouth Group, which supports the service through referrals, travelling expenses,supervision fees and insurance. The IYCS offers free counselling for young peopleaged 13-25, mainly from the West Belfast area.


57Towards a person-centre ‘culture’: the use of community development approaches in the independent youthcounselling service in West Belfast

Thompson et al (2002) noted that when IYCS was established the counselling teambelieved that many of the clients would bring ‘normal’ adolescent issues and somewith issues relating to the Troubles. The reality was very different. Over 60% oflong-term clients (11 of 18) had experienced physical abuse in their families and39% (7 of 18) had experienced sexual abuse, mostly by non-family members. 40%of the young people who had attended the service had attempted suicide and 33%of those who had attempted suicide had experienced psychiatric care. Another 30%reported self harm or suicide ideation. Six clients who had been sexually abused hadattempted suicide. The gender split in attempted suicides was 50:50 male:female(Thompson et al., 2002). Qualitative data collated more recently (Henry andMcArdle, 2003) supports the statistical data from the earlier study gathered byThompson et al (2002).

Between September 1998 and September 2002, thirty four young people wereassessed and contracted with the IYCS. Fourteen presented for up to four sessionsand twenty presented for more than four sessions. Twelve of these presented for tenor more sessions and five presented for between twenty-seven and ninety sessions.The majority of the counsellors from IYCS were trained primarily in the use of theperson-centred approach and this has had a direct impact on how IYCS operates.

Literature ReviewYouth Counselling Services

Baginsky (2004, p39) summarises literature indicating that there is little researchevaluating youth counselling, but existing studies mostly relate to schoolcounselling. These suggest that it is the quality of the counselling relationship andthe core conditions (Rogers, 1957) that are important, although some recentresearch claim that cognitive behavioural and solution-focused approaches areeffective. A study of services for young people who had been sexually abusedestimated that 90% of such children receive no substantial support and tend not touse professional services for various reasons, including lack of trust and fears aboutconfidentiality (Baginsky, 2001). Voluntary sector youth counselling servicesprovide the potential to help such young people by offering early intervention,promoting emotional literacy and self-respect, and offering opportunities to talkabout difficulties as alternatives to acting out (Baginsky, 2001).

Person-Centred CounsellingIn an overview of youth counselling, Mabey and Sorensen (1995, p25, p38) arguethat the person-centred approach is particularly suited to young people. Developedby Carl Rogers, its therapeutic aim is to facilitate a person’s ‘actualising tendency’(Kirchenbaum & Henderson, 1997, p137), promoting movement toward their‘own fulfilment, toward self-regulation and an independence from external control’(Rogers, 1980, p119).


58 Towards a person-centre ‘culture’: the use of community development approaches in the independent youthcounselling service in West Belfast

Rogers (1957) highlights three conditions as ‘necessary and sufficient’ fortherapeutic change to occur. The first condition is ‘realness or genuineness in thetherapist’ (Rogers, 1983, pp34-35) which features congruence and ‘transparency’ ofappropriate communication (Wilkins, 1997, pp36-41). The second condition isunconditional positive regard and Rogers (1995, p20) emphasises that this involvesthe therapist valuing the ‘worth and significance of the individual.’ The thirdcondition is the client’s perception of the therapist’s capacity for empathy (Rogers,1980, p149) which involves the client feeling fully understood (Rogers, 1983, p35).The consequences of empathy are that the client feels ‘valued, cared for, accepted’(Rogers, 1980, p152) and this enables them ‘to take a prizing, caring attitude towardthemselves’ (Rogers, 1980, p159). Rogers’ daughter Natalie (1993, p198) arguedthat empathy promotes ‘personal strength, self-esteem, and empowerment.’

Bugental (1978, pp66-72) suggests that ideally client-therapist relationships arecharacterised by: mutuality, honesty, respect, dynamic, vital, trusting. Therefore, thetype of power used in counselling is vitally important (Guggenbuhl-Craig, 1998).

Schmid (2000) emphasises that the person-centred approach involves an ‘ethicalstance’ which is founded on ‘empowerment’ of the client. The person-centred goalof empowerment can be linked to the ethical principle of ‘autonomy’ (BACP, 2002)which involves ‘respect for the client’s right to be self-governing’. One feature ofthis is the therapist obtaining expressed and informed consent (Beauchamp &Childress, 1994, p128). This can be of particular importance when working withclients who have been abused because it is ‘a means of sharing power with theclient’ and thus of particular value because ‘for such clients, issues of power andcontrol can be of central concern’ (Stromberg et al., 1993, p159).

Reviewing the Counselling ProcessClient autonomy is further promoted by enabling clients to have a voice inreviewing the quality and direction of the counselling. Regular reviews withinsessions are one way of fostering this by encouraging ‘relationship immediacy’featuring ‘direct mutual communication’ about the counselling relationship (Egan1986, pp232-234). Dryden (1989, p6) advocates that it is ‘productive’ in counsellingwhen both client and counsellor engage in a reflective review in which they ‘canstep back from the work that is being done and reflect together on the nature andeffects of this work.’ Such reviews are appropriate in short-term counselling(Wilson, 1997) and in long-term counselling help to avoid lack of direction andfocus and also help to promote mutual communication about each other’sperceptions of the process (Shipton & Smith, 1998). Sutton (1997) suggests thatgoals can be reviewed approximately every three to four weeks. A joint review isparticularly valuable when approaching the end of counselling as this can enableevaluation of benefits gained and areas still needing attention (Leigh, 1998). Regularreviews are regarded as potentially beneficial in wider helping approaches. For



instance, in Edinburgh Barnardo’s 16-Plus Project is a support programme whichholds regular reviews with clients. ‘They look at how they think they havedeveloped and on what areas they feel they still need support. The idea is to helppeople take charge of their own issues.’ (Scottish Development Centre for MentalHealth, 2002, p23).

SupervisionClinical supervision is regarded as essential in youth counselling (Mabey andSorensen, 1995). Indeed, supervision is described as an ‘obligation’ and ‘ethicalresponsibility’ by the BACP (2002) and is widely affirmed as good practice forcounsellors (Carroll, 1999; Dryden & Thorne, 1998; Feltham & Dryden, 1999;Hawkins & Shohet, 1993; Shipton, 1997; Wheeler & King, 2001). A person-centredapproach to supervision has also been promoted in the literature (Hackney &Goodyear, 1984; Tudor & Worrall, 2004). The ‘quality of the supervisoryrelationship is central to the perceived benefit to the counsellors and the direct andindirect impact this has on client work’ and a ‘supportive, encouraging andegalitarian relationship… with honesty and openness’ is perceived to be preferableand tends to generate a parallel process in the relationship between counsellors andclients (Vallance, 2004, p571).

Voluntary CounsellingCounselling can be voluntary or paid and McLeod (1999) suggests that the‘voluntary sector has been the bedrock of counselling in Britain’ and he estimatesthat more than 50% of counselling contacts are through voluntary sector agencies.However, he also suggests that there is a ‘steady movement’ towards counsellingbecoming a profession that is regulated and has a full-time paid workforce.Nevertheless, McLeod expresses his wish ‘to make the strongest possible case forthe retention of volunteer counsellors in voluntary agencies.’ He argues that hisreasons include that the demand for counselling could not be met otherwise andnon-paid counselling, ‘when appropriately supervised’, can be as effective as paid.He adds that voluntary agencies are more socially ‘inclusive’ because they tend notto label clients. He purports that involvement in voluntary counselling candisseminate counselling competencies into the counsellors’ other workplaces andcommunities and enable participation as citizens. McLeod (1999) suggests thatanother benefit of voluntary counselling is that compared to professionalcounsellors ‘volunteer workers are less likely to burn out’ and the ‘quality ofgenerosity, of choosing to give in this way, has the potential to give voluntarycounselling a special quality of authenticity.’

Community DevelopmentCommunity development is a broad term that refers to a set of values, approachesand ultimately actions that have arisen from the needs and activities of acommunity. The work is self-help in nature and arises from the experience of those



who face a problem (Logue, 1991). Two key principles underlying communitydevelopment are: firstly, that people have the ability to act together to gain influenceover issues which impact upon their community and secondly, that, when engaged,the skills, knowledge and experience of people can impact on the structures andsystems of society which bear down upon them (McCready, 2002). Theseprinciples are further emphasised by the Assets Model advocated by Kretzman andMcKnight (1993). This model identifies that ‘significant community developmenttakes place only when local people are committed to investing themselves and theirresources in their efforts’ (Kretzman and McKnight, 1993, p5). Their observationexplains why communities are never built from the ‘top down’ or from the ‘outsidein’ (p9). The model has three interrelated characteristics. Firstly, the process is“assets-based” i.e., the strategy starts with the capacities within the community. Thesecond characteristic is that the process is “internally focused” and finally it is“relationship driven”. Heaton and Sayer (1992, p12) also identify three similarcharacteristics of community development. Firstly, people are valued rather thandevalued whereby potential is promoted rather than offered protection. Secondly,access to decision-making processes and power-sharing is advocated. Thirdly, thereis a focus on the concerns of local people rather than providing a standard packageof service agreed with the local authority.

DesignIn 2003, IYCS commissioned a study to evaluate the value and impact of the serviceprovided to its clients, also with a view to drafting a 5-year development plan.Objectives were to:

• identify the impact and effectiveness of the existing counselling service onthe growth and development of clients;

• identify the strengths and weaknesses and gaps of the existing model inpractical and operational terms;

• make recommendations for future operational and strategic development,through the design of a development plan.

The entire volume of analysed data generated from the evaluation is not hereinrepresented. Weaknesses and gaps of the existing counselling service were identifiedand addressed as part of the initial report. This article aims to focus on the strengthsof the existing counselling service, to better understand its nature, how it hasmanifested itself and, finally to determine its relevance and impact on thecommunity it serves.

The approach chosen for this piece of social research is a phenomenological one.Phenomenology takes account of how humans experience and interpret the world(Cohen and Manion, 1997, p29). It allows the research participants to interpret forthemselves the meaning of their lives and the world they inhabit and recognises theexistence of multiple (and potentially contradictory) realities. Massarik (1980)



describes the use of phenomenology in understanding the central meaning ofevents and their significance for the people who experience them. Phenomenologyfurther maintains that social components cannot be separated and that the interplayof these elements is part of the complexity of the picture. Therefore context andviewpoint are amalgamated into the very essence of this social world.

In determining a phenomenological research methodology, consideration was givento how best to capture its essential characteristics. The methodological tools werechosen to specifically encourage an unravelling of participants’ ‘truths’. A qualitativemethodology was chosen to be congruent with a phenomenological approach.McLeod (1994, p78) notes the function of such a methodology:

‘… is to uncover and illuminate what things mean to people.’

In phenomenological interviews, the experiences of a number of players engaged ina process can be analysed and used to understand the core characteristics and centralmeanings of events. For clients and the counselling supervisor, in-depth one-to-onesemi-structured interviews were carried out. Themes were carefully selected toelicit information on the service, the relationship and the process rather thanpersonal information on the client. The interview structure was devised toencourage participants to tell the story of their counselling experience in narrativeform; moving from their memories and impressions of their first sessions throughto the closing sessions. The interview schedules, although semi-structured, werecarefully designed by the researchers to obtain both positive and negativeperceptions of the IYCS. Interviews lasted on average 40 minutes each, and wereaudio-taped and transcribed, with the consent of participants. Counsellors andreferrers took part in focus group discussions, also audio-taped and transcribed foranalysis. A postal questionnaire was also administered to all the counsellors prior tothe focus groups.

A requirement of phenomenological research is that interviewees are chosen byvirtue of their ‘intense interest’ in the subject, as defined by Moustakas (1994).Thus, all key constituents associated with IYCS were invited to participate in theevaluation – clients, counsellors, referrers and supervisor. This is a form ofpurposive sample, as described by Jankowicz (1991), to reflect a specific population.

Eight previous clients (five female, three male) were randomly selected toparticipate in this study. All had participated in the counselling process until theyhad chosen to terminate. All five females agreed to take part in this study and thethree males declined. Although this presents issues for the researchers regardingwhether the findings can be generalized from the specific to the general population,it perhaps highlights the difficulties of emotional competence for some young menin Northern Ireland. Harland andMorgan (2003, p 82-83) emphasize how workingwith young men can bring to the surface a range of powerful emotions and feelings





that many may have previously suppressed. With ethical responsibilities towardsresearch participants in mind, the researchers chose not to pursue interviews withthe three male ex-clients, to respect their wishes and the voluntary nature of theresearch process. Six counsellors, five of the main referrers and the service’scounselling supervisor agreed to participate. This sample size is consideredappropriate to generate the type of data required for this study (Buston, 2002).

The ethical dilemmas in evaluating counselling practice have been welldocumented (BACP, 2001, McLeod, 2001, West 2002). Care was taken to provideresearch participants with advance information about the research purpose andprocess. Information was sent to clients prior to interviews, outlining the contentof the interviews, future use of material, choice of male or female interviewer,confidentiality and request for written consent. This written consent was obtainedprior to the interviews. Therefore, all participants of the study gave consent for datato be used in written material and publications. The client’s counsellor briefed theindividual client privately, before the interview commenced and was in attendancein an adjoining room to offer counselling support if required. The confidentialnature of the interview again was stressed and pseudonyms are used throughoutthis paper to protect the identity of individual participants. The client’s right towithdraw at any time was also emphasised at the beginning of the interview, as wasthe right not to answer any question which may cause discomfort or distress(Buston, 2002).

FindingsCommunity Development and the Person-Centred Culture

The findings indicated that the work of the IYCS features a blend of two distinctbut linked schools of thought – the principles and practices of communitydevelopment in alliance with the person-centred approach. IYCS operates within acommunity development backdrop, infrastructure and process that advocate anapproach that values individuals and promotes power-sharing and actualisation ofpotential. It is an approach that is tailored to the local context. The Service embedsthe person-centred counselling relationship within such community developmentvalues and processes. IYCS, in its design and delivery, therefore seems to havedrawn on both schools of thought and this seems to cultivate a broader person-centred culture. The findings indicate that the key features of IYCS that collectivelymanifest this person-centred culture are:

• The counselling relationship and therapeutic movement• The six-week review• The nature of supervision• The voluntary commitment of counsellors.• A community-based service

The findings in relation to each of these features will be presented.

The Counselling Relationship and Therapeutic MovementThis counselling service is rooted in the quality of the client-counsellor relationshipwhich is held to be of fundamental importance. Although not necessarilyarticulated as such by the participants, the scope of facilitative skills describedillustrates a considered and complete engagement by the counsellor. This wasunderpinned by the qualities and skills of congruence, empathy and unconditionalpositive regard. These inter-related to foster trust.

Clients recognised counsellor congruence through the counsellor’s opencommunication of what was perceived as realness and genuineness:

‘I have been to other counsellors and I think they just read from books. Personally,xxxxx just counsels from the heart. He was far better than the rest of them.’(‘Ann’, client).

Both counsellor and client work together to create a relationship which has realnessat the centre, providing clients with a space where being genuine is the rule ratherthan the exception.

A second indication of genuineness is the counsellor’s use of appropriate challenge,in moving the client beyond comfort to often difficult, yet more real, places. Oneclient reported that the counsellor accurately challenged her to work on anunexpressed emotion:

‘He just knew how angry I was and he said to me that I had a lot of anger that Ineeded to work on.’ (‘Sharon’, client)

This example could also be an indication of empathy. Communicating empathy wasa feature of the counsellor’s interaction with the client, with ‘feeling understood’being a recurrent theme in the clients’ interviews:

‘It just helped me to talk to someone who I knew would listen and understand what Iwas saying. I couldn’t talk to anybody else at the time. Yes, it was very important tosee him regular, because it just helped me to talk to someone that I knew and wouldlisten and understand what I was saying.’ (‘Clare’, client)

Clients recognised not only the regular presence of empathy, but also the qualityand depth of empathy shown by the counsellor. Primarily this was illustratedthrough clients reporting that they felt understood and cared for, but alsomanifested in a sustained way in that clients perceived that the counsellorrecognised and worked at the psychological pace of the client and attended to therhythm and speed of the client’s movement and growth. This honouring of theclient’s pace was reported both in relation to not rushing the client within a sessionand also in relation to respecting the pace in the overall process of counselling.

‘…it was never a rush to get it over and get me out.’ (‘Sharon’, client)



‘Words can’t describe it… It was just the patience and the quality of time that sheprovided for you’. (‘Mary’, client)

These experiences were perceived by several clients to lie in sharp contrastto perceived lack of empathy by those they had confided in before in thestatutory services.

‘I was referred to a psychiatric department in______. I was there for about threemonths. I got really upset one day… I disclosed something so deep and he really shutme down… I thought ‘well I have had enough of you’… All he was interested in waseating, what I weighed and making sure I kept my diary of what I was eating. It wasvery pathetic, very, very pathetic’. (‘Mary’, client)

Clients reported feeling valued without judgement in IYCS:

‘Then I began to say (to myself) Okay, this is being valued here. I am not beingswitched off… I really, really trusted her and I gave it all that I had because she wasall that I had.’ (‘Mary’, client).

Another client reported a perception of other support services:

‘I felt too young to go to speak to a big doctor person you know who wouldprobably… I would think – that they would sit and judge me.’ (‘Sharon’, client).

Then when asked about feeling judged by the IYCS counsellor, the client responded:

‘No, never ever, not once, never ever. He is such an important person and he hasplayed such an important part in my life and I will never ever till the end of mydays… I’m going to start crying… till the end of my days never forget it.’(‘Sharon’, client).

The above qualities and skills seemed to inter-relate to foster trust. Clients explicitlyacknowledged the trustworthiness of the counsellors as an important factor.

‘then it really felt so comfortable and so trusting that I could tell her the most deepestdarkest of everything that I went through and into such explicit detail and thenwhenever I went into the wee world that I needed to go into, to do the thing – to saythe things I needed to say, she was just great.’ (‘Mary’, client).

The beneficial nature of the qualities, skills and trust fostered was evident in thatclients reported that the counselling had contributed to therapeutic movement,both personally and interpersonally. Personal growth featured aspects such asbecoming stronger, more confident and able to perceive things more positively:

‘I did become very confident and outgoing when I started coming here and it reallymade me see myself as somebody else… I wasn’t just a doormat that anybody couldjust walk over and that I was someone…’ (‘Clare’, client).





All clients were asked if they felt the counselling had an impact on their lives and ifso, to describe the changes that had taken place and all comments were positive.While the indicators of growth or change for each client were different, thecounselling impact was evident. ‘Clare’ reported growing in confidence and nowvaluing her self-worth. ‘Ann’ described how she had taken control over her weeklyalcohol consumption.

‘I would only touch drink once a week now, before I was drinking seven nights aweek, morning, noon and night.’ (‘Ann’, client).

‘Nuala’ described changes in her temperament.

It has made me a better person in coping with things, I wouldn’t have a short fuse likeI used to have.’ (‘Nuala’, client).

‘Sharon’ specified how counselling saved her life.

‘If it wasn’t for the counselling I wouldn’t be sitting here today. I can honestly saythat, I do believe that in my heart, I would have committed suicide a long time ago. Iam looking towards the future now… I set myself goals as I learned through thecounselling. I set myself goals in life.’ (‘Sharon’, client).

This was one example of how clients reported that skills they learned in counsellinghad been transferred into their lives during and after leaving counselling. ‘Mary’reported realising the unexpected dream of a stable marriage:

‘I have a marriage which is stable and calm. I never thought that would happen.’(‘Mary’, client).

Clients also reported that after counselling they were able to make other positivechanges in their lives, such as working hard in school, getting a house, getting a job,getting promotion.

The counsellors were also clear about the positive outcomes for clients where theyhad observed and witnessed changes in growth and development:

‘She can talk about her abuse… she is a very happy person. When she came ininitially she was like a lump of jelly… she couldn’t have had a child at the time… shenow has.’ (‘Larry’, counsellor).

‘The other sign of growth was that she contemplated suicide on a number ofoccasions… eventually she said I don’t think about that anymore and I felt that wasgrowth and development.’ (‘Sean’, counsellor).

The cornerstone of the person-centred approach is the belief that individuals havethe capacity to define and clarify their own goals and that this can happen within asafe environment. The beneficial nature of the qualities, skills and trust fostered at

IYCS was evident where the clients and counsellors clearly reported that thecounselling had contributed to therapeutic movement.

The Six-week ReviewAfter assessment and agreeing to become clients, young people contracted for aninitial six-week period. Progress was reviewed after each six-week period with allclients, with the option to terminate or continue. The four main ingredients of thissix-week review are a review of relationship, review of progress, review of thecontract and review of the process. This method allowed for a period of reflection,taking stock and an assessment of the mental well-being of the client:

‘We actually built in the six-week review… research into counselling would say thatreflecting on the counselling process itself was actually useful to the clients… It wastrying to make the process conscious – bringing it to consciousness.’(‘Gerry’, counselling supervisor)

The review motivates the client to choose whether they wish to re-commit to thecounselling process for a further six weeks. This engages clients in a process of self-determination – of the client making decisions by and for her/him. With this re-commitment comes further investment into the counselling process.

The review also engages the evaluative skills of the client; as distinct from beingevaluated. It is also significant as counselling often works on an emotional level, butthrough the review process, the cognitive and intellectual faculties are engaged. Theholistic nature of this method is evident as all aspects of the counselling experienceare reviewed:

‘It was really thorough, every six weeks, we had an open and honest chat to see wherewe were – if what we had been addressing was beneficial, is there anything else wecould be addressing to go into something more in-depth or not, is the time okay orwhatever…’ (‘Mary’, client)

Another client noted her awareness of the purpose and function of this tool – as areviewing process, as opposed to a push towards terminating the relationship:

‘Instead of “your six weeks is up, away you go” they just continue with you as long asit takes. That is good and a rare quality and you don’t get that too often. In fact, Idon’t think I have ever seen it being given anywhere else.’ (‘Mary’, client)

‘Sharon’ noted how the review provided her with the opportunity and space tomake one of the most important decisions in her life:

‘It used to be reviewed every six weeks: “well, how do you feel, do you think youwould need a little bit longer?”… But I got so much courage and I said “I’m ready, Ihave to make this decision on my own…”.’ (‘Sharon’, client).



The review was obviously viewed as supportive and as an explicit articulation aboutprogress and development. The most important aspect is that the clients play a rolein their own evaluation and assessment, which ultimately empowers them andplaces them at the centre of this decision-making process. This promoted equalityof power within the client-counsellor relationship.

The Nature of SupervisionThe supervision model used within IYCS is significant in principle and approach asit underpins the ethos and practices of the counselling service. Clinical groupsupervision is carried out on a monthly basis and operates a person-centred model.The supervision mirrors the quality of the counselling experience, with the coreconditions of Rogerian counselling permeating throughout. Data analysis revealedthree key aspects present in this supervision model.

The first is that care lives at the centre of the model, with an explicit belief that carebegets care. This care refers both to the care that one counsellor feels for clients, forcolleagues and the group and also to the reciprocal care between the counsellors andsupervisor. This is shown in the collegiality which flourishes among the group:

‘I think the strength of it is there \is a good bond there between the team, we haveworked together, we know each other and the sharing of work under supervision… sothat is a behind the scenes strength or an under-current strength which is thefoundation of the work.’ (‘Michael’, counsellor).

A second feature is of the creation of a culture of congruence within the supervisiongroup, which, coupled with care, encourages meaningful and supportive dialogue:

‘Even the experience within supervision would be of people who are there to genuinelycare and are there to be as honest and as real and as genuine as possible.’(‘Gary’, counsellor).

This encourages a reflective openness and an ethos of self-learning. The group isthus given implicit permission to share in perceived failure or poor practice as wellas successes and to negotiate their way, collectively, through difficult oruncomfortable territory:

‘From Day One it has been a very real process in that people were talking about howthey are getting on and saying about “I haven’t an F’ing notion where to go next”,you know that kind of thing. Just keeping it real, it is about the client, it is aboutwhere they are at and it is about me in the middle of all that. It is just that it has beena very, very real concrete experience.’ (‘Gary’, counsellor).

‘the supervision is… real’ (‘Sean’, counsellor)

The third most significant feature of the group supervision is mutuality and thejoint nature of responsibility and accountability in action. There is a mutual



relationship in which the supervisor and counsellor share responsibility and inwhich both are responsible for the wellbeing and development of the counsellor.The group supervision goes further in that the group is not merely the mode orstructure of supervision but the process. The distinction is between supervisionamongst the group as opposed to supervision of a group. This is a model ofsupervision by supervisor and peers. This negates hierarchical notions whichelevate the status of ‘supervisor’ to expert and, in contrast, generates a learningcommunity which operates through a self-learning and co-learning system:

‘and equality as well, I think there is equality among the counsellors’(‘Gary’, counsellor)

The factors combined to create a quality supervision experience that was felt by thecounsellors to be integral to the effectiveness of the service. One counsellor alsoidentified this quality as being an important factor in the retention of the volunteercounsellors over a significant period of time.

‘the quality of the supervision: I don’t think we would be together as much if it hadn’tbeen for that…’ (‘Sean’, counsellor)

The Voluntary Commitment of CounsellorsThe voluntary nature of the service had a profound effect on the work. Thisvoluntary commitment was viewed by the clients as a tangible illustration of theirworth and value, a concept which most clients had hitherto doubted. The impact ofthe volunteer commitment built upon the unconditional positive regard felt by theclient within the counselling relationship:

‘The fact that he did it voluntary… he does this voluntary and I was thinking he issitting here trying to help me for nothing. I can’t really grasp the words to explainwhat kind of feeling that is knowing that somebody is taking time out to listen to me,my problems, my crap – it’s just an overwhelming emotion.’ (‘Sharon’, client)

However, one client when asked whether she thought the counselling should bevoluntary or paid responded:

‘Definitely to be paid. Well for the amount of service they give money couldn’t paythem anyway. But I think a wee token would show them their worth.’(‘Mary’, client)

For the counsellors, the voluntary aspect of the service was pivotal to the ethos andculture of them as a group:

‘The voluntary aspect has been hugely, hugely important… you know, we want to doit’ (‘Sean’, counsellor).

‘…the commitment of the people involved.’ (‘Nicola’, counsellor)





This provided a shared understanding of the motivation of the group members,which, in turn, increased a sense of trust and faith in one another. The collegialityfelt through group supervision was complemented through the shared valuesassociated with volunteering.

Volunteering is primarily an altruistic practice with positive outcomes for abeneficiary, yet the nature of the commitment holds many benefits for the volunteeralso. It can replace a duty with a choice, a subtle yet important distinction. In IYCS,that is not to say that there was less commitment, by the volunteer, rather that thecommitment was continuously renewed and re-affirmed throughout the span of therelationship. New clients were taken on through the explicit agreement of thecounsellor. Using the principle of informed choice, counsellors could consider theirown circumstances, skills and needs in deciding whether they wished to enter into anew counselling relationship at any given time. The impact of this was to minimiseor avoid burnout. This aspect was articulated by the counselling supervisor:

‘The client-load per counsellor is actually quite small, so you are not gettingcompassion-fatigue.’ (‘Gerry’, counselling supervisor)

‘I think that the load isn’t heavy; it is actually a strength and I think it is transmittedthrough to clients.’ (‘Gerry’ counselling supervisor)

This ensured that the counsellor and client were equally cared for and valuedwithin the service.

A Community-based ServiceThe fact that the project is community-based further enhances the model. Thecreation of safety and familiarity through the localness of place and people reduceswhat might otherwise cause anxiety for potential clients. Ciarrochi et al (2001) notethat one in five children and adolescents in the UK experience mental heath issues,but that those who were low in emotional competence were more likely to seekhelp from informal sources rather than doctors or health professionals. To countersuch treatment fearfulness, IYCS has adopted an informal systemic approach toensuring accessibility is increased and a sense of safety is created. A welcomingenvironment has been established in the building, the location is central and thereferrers are trusted link persons; akin to a facilitative guide into IYCS:

‘For young people from West Belfast the location is easily accessible.’(‘Nicola’, counsellor)

‘…having personal knowledge of the referrer [is a strength]’ (‘Sean’, counsellor)

‘(This building has) brilliant memories (for me).’ (‘Clare’, client)

‘I would come back to the same place. I have actually said about this place to a couple offriends who might need it… It is the atmosphere when you come in that makes you feelrelaxed’. (‘Ann’, client)

This is further consolidated by the fact that the counsellors either work or live inthe immediate community which they serve. Alongside the professional training ofthe counsellor, this shared cultural understanding provides counsellors with acultural competency which outsiders may lack.

These community-based features allow individuals to feel comfortable and tobelieve that the experience is grounded in a reality that is embraced and accepted bythem. This paves the way for congruent exchanges between counsellor and client.

DiscussionBuston (2002) notes the importance of young people with mental health problemshaving the opportunity to present their views on the health services which are thereto support them. In this paper, an in-depth examination of the views of a smallnumber of clients, while not representative statistically, also provides insights intotheir perspectives on the value and impact of the service provided. What emerges isa number of significant closely linked features which collectively manifestthemselves in a person-centred ‘culture’ which is above and beyond what is morecommonly referred to as the person-centred approach (Rogers, 1957).

The Independent Youth Counselling Service features a blend of person-centred(Rogers, 1995) and community development (Heaton & Sayer, 1992, p12) principlesand practices. The person-centred approach is holistic in that it focuses on theperson rather than a problem. Whilst the importance of such a holistic approach isacknowledged as central to the counselling relationship, the findings indicate greaterclient impact when such a person-centred approach is reflected in the widercounselling experience. This is what we refer to as the person-centred culture.

The person-centred culture is broader than the counselling relationship in a sessionor series of sessions. Rather, it refers to the creation of a congruent growth-promoting environment which supports and adds to the client’s one-to-oneexperience with the counsellor and also promotes counsellor well-being anddevelopment. This paper explores a systemic model which is person-centred fromthe core to the margins and illustrates the impact on service users and staff.

The issue of accessing counselling services which are ‘young people friendly’ and‘young people centred’ has been a major topic of discussion in the counsellingworld (Burgess et al, 1998; Coleman et al, 1997; Henry, 1999; Laws et al, 1999).Treatment fearfulness and stigma are two of the main barriers (Deane &Chamberlain, 1994; Kushner & Sher, 1991). In an earlier study Henry identified theneed for:

‘Services to be local, accessible, non-stigmatising, confidential and easy to identify andunderstand’ (Henry, 1999, p46).





The IYCS person-centred culture promotes the creation of safety and familiaritythrough an informal, systemic and community-based approach to ensure thataccessibility will be greatly increased. IYCS has established a central location, awelcoming environment, a community development ethos, trusted referrers and ashared cultural understanding through the use of local voluntary counsellors.

Clients who have accessed the service highlight the core conditions of thecounselling relationship – congruence, empathy and unconditional positive regard –as being valued and as contributing to the fostering of trust and leading totherapeutic movement, empowerment and positive practical outcomes.

Consistent with both the person-centred and community development approachesis the fostering of equality of power and its sharing which is a feature of the IYCSas a system. This is based on an ethical approach (Schmid, 2000) that respects eachindividual’s worth and autonomy (BACP, 2002). Sharing of power and decision-making is also manifest in the six weekly reviews. The findings indicate that clients,counsellors and supervisor are thoroughly convinced of its usefulness andeffectiveness. Its rationale is clear to the clients and, through its integration into thecounselling process, it has had a major empowering influence on clients and acrucial role in the development and transferral of skills outside the counsellingcontext. Two key aspects of the six-week review can be seen as especiallynoteworthy: the use of ‘here and now’ reviewing to evaluate progress and the useof feedback to change approach, where necessary (Kolb 1984 pp21-22).

Sharing of power is also manifest in the relationship between the counsellors andthe supervisor. The counsellors clearly identified, not only the existence ofsupervision as essential to the counselling process, but, more importantly thequality of the person-centred supervision as being integral to the service. Themerits of person-centred group supervision, the aspects of care, congruence andmutuality, the collegiality that flourishes and the ensuing personal and professionaldevelopment are all reported as playing a major role in providing a high qualityservice to clients. The supervision thus benefits both counsellors and, moreindirectly, clients particularly by means of developing the counsellors’ congruencein supervision and thus in counselling (Vallance, 2004).

The voluntary commitment of the IYCS counsellors not only adds to the person-centred culture but also links to the Assets Model advocated by Kretzman andMcKnight (1993) whereby the first building block is from the ‘inside out’. Theassets (the counsellors) are at the disposal of the community, to be used to build thecapacity of others. Clients further perceive the unpaid investment by counsellors asa heightened form of unconditional positive regard. To state that volunteerismcorrelates to more effective mental health services would be to over-simplify acomplex process. Its significance is in providing tangible evidence of care for clientsand in reducing client misgivings about the financial incentive to counsel.



Therefore the perceived message behind the voluntary commitment is moreimportant than volunteerism itself.

However, this voluntary counselling service contains a fundamental paradox. In aservice that promotes the principles and practice of self-care among clients, it raisesa doubt about the levels of self-care manifested among the volunteer workers. Aservice which is entirely staffed by volunteers, as opposed to volunteers as addedvalue, is in danger of leaning heavily upon its human resources. Long-termsustainability may be a potential difficulty for a service which is wholly voluntary innature. IYCS is currently grappling with possible difficulties in where to place theservice on the Paid-Voluntary continuum so as to best promote self-care of bothclient and counsellor on a long term basis.

ConclusionIYCS is grounded in person-centeredness which maximises the potential forgrowth and development for clients and counsellors. This holistic approach tocounselling service provision employs a body of processes, which collectively areused to embed the core service in a complementary framework. This paperdescribes key features needed to promote a ‘culture’ of person-centeredness,thereby increasing the empowerment of clients. The empowerment of youngpeople in health-related decision-making is important (WHO, 1993) which isupheld by the work of IYCS.

The findings indicate that the Independent Youth Counselling Service hasgenerated a person-centred culture that has systemic congruence throughout andthus promotes effective client and counsellor care. It illustrates the importance ofincluding these significant features in future counselling services for young people.Further analysis suggests that locally based counselling services should be enshrinedin community development principles and ethos. The roots of IYCS are in thecommunity; they evolve from the community; it is self-help in nature. Theinterventions of the counsellors have been informed by the person-centredapproach and this links to community development interventions which are basedon social justice, participation and equality. Such an organisational approach wouldbe consistent with the ‘settings’ for health approach as advocated by the WorldHealth Organisation (WHO 1991/1993). The approach recognises that health isinfluenced by multiple interdependent and interacting psychological, physical andsocial factors. It attempts to focus on the generation of a holistic context that isconducive to health, in which physical environment, relationships and the cultureor ethos creates a climate that supports wellbeing.

The person-centred culture featured in IYCS is formed from a series of inter-related parts creating a system of care in which the quality of care is modelled by thesupervisor and in turn by the counsellors thus increasing the tendency towards self-care as a belief and behaviour for both counsellors and clients.



BIBLIOGRAPHY

BACP (2001). Ethical Framework for Good Practice in Counselling and Psychotherapy. Rugby: BritishAssociation for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP).

BACP (2002). Ethical Framework for Good Practice in Counselling and Psychotherapy. Rugby: BACP.

Baginsky, M. (Ed.) (2001). Counselling and support services for young people aged 12-16 who have experiencedsexual abuse: A study of the provision in Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. London: NSPCCPublications.

Baginsky, W. (2004). School Counselling in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: a review. NSPCCInformation Briefings. London: NSPCC. Accessed 13/08/2006. http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/OnlineResources/InformationBriefings/SchoolCounselling/SchoolCounselling_pdf_gf25393.pdf(Last accessed 08 Aug. 2006).

Beauchamp, T. L. & Childress, J. F. (1994). Principles of Biomedical Ethics. (4th Ed.) Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Bugental, J.F.T. (1978). Psychotherapy and Process: The Fundamentals of an Existential-Humanistic Approach.Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.

Burgess, S., Hawton, K. & Loveday, G. (1998). Adolescents who take overdoses: outcomes in terms ofchanges in psychopathology and the adolescent’s attitude to care and to their overdose. Journal ofAdolescence. Vol 21 No 2 (April).

Buston, K. (2002). Adolescents with mental health problems: what do they say about health services?Journal of Adolescence, 25, pp231-242.

Carroll, M. (1999). Counselling Supervision. London: Cassell.

Ciarrochi, J., Deane, P., Wilson, C. and Rickwood, D. (2001). Adolescents who need help the most arethe least likely to seek it: the relationship between low emotional competence and low intention to seekhelp. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, vol.30, no.2. pp173-188.

Cohen, L. and Manion, L. (1997). Research Methods in Education. 4th Ed. London, New York: Routledge.

Coleman, J., Catan, L. & Dennison, C. (1997). You’re the last person I’d talk to. In Jeremy Roche, J.,Tucker, S., Flynn, R. & Thomson, R. (Eds.) Youth in Society. London: Sage.

Deane, F. & Chamberlain, K. (1994). Treatment fearfulness and distress as predictors of professionalpsychological help seeking. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling. Vol 22, No 2. pp207-217.

Dryden, W (1989). Key Issues for Counselling in Action. London: Sage.

Dryden, W. & Thorne, B. (Eds.) (1998). Training and Supervision for Counselling in Action. London: SagePublications.

Egan, G. (1986). The Skilled Helper. California: Brooks/Cole.

Feltham, C. & Dryden, W. (1999). Developing Counselling Supervision. London: Sage Publications.

Guggenbuhl-Craig, A. (1998). Power in the Helping Professions. Spring Publications.

Hackney, H. & Goodyear, R.K. (1984). Carl Rogers’s Client-Centered Approach to Supervision(chpt.14, pp278-296). In: Levant, R.E. & Shlien, J.M. (Eds.) Client-Centered Therapy and the Person-Centered Approach. NY: Praeger Publishers

Harland, K. & Morgan, S. (2003) Youth Work with Young Men in Northern Ireland: An Advocacy Approach.Youth and Policy, 81, pp74-85. Leicester: National Youth Agency

Hawkins, P. & Shohet, R. (1993). Supervision in the Helping Professions. Milton Keynes: OpenUniversity Press.

Heaton, K. & Sayer, J. (1992). Community Development and Child Welfare. London: CommunityDevelopment Foundation.



Henry, P. (1998) Community Based Youth Work-The Challenge and the Potential. Belfast: BBC Children inNeed, Making Belfast Work and the Belfast Education and Library Board.

Henry, P. (1999). Someone to talk to... Someone to listen… (A Consultative Report with young people in WestBelfast, on who they would confide in at a time of crisis and a presentation of their views on existing andproposed support services). Belfast: West Belfast Partnership Board, North and West Belfast Health andSocial Services Trust and Belfast Education and Library Board.

Henry, P. & Mc Ardle, E. (2003). Evaluation of the Youth Counselling Service (IYCS) West Belfast. Belfast:Independent Youth Counselling Service.

Jankowich, A.D. (1991) Business research projects for students. London: Chapman & Hall.

Kirschenbaum, H. & Henderson, V.L. (Eds) (1997). The Carl Rogers Reader. London: Constable.

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Kretzman, J. & McKnight, J. (1993) Building communities from the inside out-A path toward finding andmobilizing a community’s assets. Chicago: ACTA.

Kushner, M. & Sher, K. (1991). The relation of treatment fearfulness and psychological serviceutilisation: an overview. Professional Psychology Research and Practice, Vol.22:196-203 cited in Deane et al(1994) Treatment fearfulness and distress as predictors of professional psychological help seeking. BritishJournal of Guidance and Counselling. 22(2) pp207-217.

Laws, S., Armutt, D., Metzendorf, W., Percival, & Reisel, J. (1999). Time to listen: Young peoples’ experiencesof mental health services. London: Save the Children & The Mental Health Foundation.

Leigh, A. (1998). Referral and Termination Issues for Counsellors. London: Sage.

Lister, P. (1999). A taxonomy for developing cultural competence. Nurse Education Today, 19(4)pp313-318

Logue, K. (1991).Community Development in Northern Ireland: Perspectives for the Future. Belfast:CommunityDevelopment Review Group.

Mabey, J. and Sorensen, B. (1995). Counselling for Young People. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Massarik, F. (1980). Human Systems Development: New Perspectives on People and Organisations. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. London: Sage.

McCready, S. (2002). Empowering People-Community Development and Conflict 1969-1999. Belfast: TheStationery Office.

McLeod, J. (1994). Doing Counselling Research. London: Sage.

McLeod, J. (1999). The importance of the voluntary sector in the provision of counselling services.University of Abertay Dundee. http://shs.tay.ac.uk/shtjm/Importance%20of.html (Last accessed07 Nov. 2004).

McLeod, J. (2001). Qualitative Research in Counselling and Psychotherapy. London: Sage.

Proctor, B. (1994). Supervision – competence, confidence, accountability. British Journal of Guidance andCounselling, Vol.22. No.3.

Rogers, C. (1957). The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic Personality Change. Journalof Counselling Psychology. Vol.21 p99

Rogers, C.R. (1980). A Way of Being. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Rogers, C.R. (1983). Freedom to Learn for the 80’s. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Publ. Co.

Rogers, C.R. (1995). Client-Centered Therapy. London: Constable.

Rogers, N. (1993). The Creative Connection: Expressive Arts as Healing. Palo Alto, CA: Science & BehaviorBooks Inc.

Schmid, Peter F. (2000). The necessary and sufficient conditions of being person-centered: On identity,integrity, integration and differentiation of the paradigm. Semiplenary paper at the Vth ICCCEP,Chicago. Revised version in Watson, J.C., Goldmann, R.N. & Warner, M.S. (Eds.), (2002) Client-centeredand experiential psychotherapy in the 21st century: Advances in theory, research and practice, 36-51. Ross-on-Wye:PCCS Books. http://www.pfs-onlinj19e.at/papers/paper-chicago.htm (Last accessed 08 Aug. 2006).

Scottish Development Centre for Mental Health (2002) 9. Barnardos 16 Plus Project, Edinburgh. InPreventing Suicide and Deliberate Self Harm. Laying the Foundations: Identifying Practice Examples. Project Report.Scottish Executive/Health Department, Public Health Division. July. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/health/lfpr.pdf (Last accessed 26 Feb. 2005).

Shipton, G. (Ed.) (1997). Supervision of Psychotherapy and Counselling. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Shipton, G. & Smith, E. (1998). Long-term Counselling. London: Sage.

Stromberg, D., Stone, G. & Claiborn, C. (1993). Informed consent: Therapists’ beliefs and practices.Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 24, pp153-159.

Sutton, C. (1997). Reviewing and Evaluating Therapeutic Progress. In Palmer & McMahon (Eds) ClientAssessment, pp168-186. London: Sage.

Thompson W., McCavana, J., & McGreevy, N. (2002). Suicide as an issue for young people in Belfast. WestBelfast Independent Youth Counselling Service.

Tudor, K. & Worrall, M. (2004). Freedom to Practise: Person-centred approaches to supervision. Ross-on-Wye:PCCS Books.

Vallance, K. (2004). Exploring counsellor perceptions of the impact of counselling supervision on clients.British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, Nov; 32(4) pp559-574.

West, W. (2002). Some ethical dilemmas in counselling and counselling research. British Journal ofGuidance & Counselling, Vol.30, No. 3 p261-268.

Wheeler, S. & King, d. (Eds.) (2001). Supervising Counsellors: Issues of responsibility. London: SagePublications.

WHO (1991/1993). Health for all targets. The health policy for Europe. (Revised) Copenhagen: World HealthOrganization, Regional Office for Europe.

WHO (1993). The Health of Young People: A Challenge and a Promise. Geneva, Switzerland: World HealthOrganization.

Wilkins, P. (1997). Congruence and Countertransference: similarities and differences. Counselling, Feb;8(1) pp36-41.

Wilson, J. (1997). Choosing a time-limited Counselling Contract. In Sills, C. (Ed.) Contracts inCounselling, pp173-189. London: Sage.




77Who is Youth Work for? Distortions and Possibilities

WHO IS YOUTH WORK FOR? DISTORTIONS ANDPOSSIBILITIES

Terry Barber

ABSTRACTThis paper explores competing perspectives relating to the policy and practice of YouthWork. The title suggests that there are significant distortions and opposing viewsrelating to the status of young people and the development of response provision. Thepaper argues that by developing methodologies which challenge the negative positioningof young people we are more able to develop meaningful relationships both structurallyand in practice. Finally, there is an analysis of engagement models and democraticways of working within institutions serving young people.

IntroductionMany years ago I was involved in the joint planning of a conference on youth workin Tayside entitled “Who is Youth Work For”? This was a successful conferenceattracting youth work practitioners from all over Scotland. The theme was fairlysimple; we wanted to get to the root of this conundrum that many of us felt wasshaping the work that we were doing. Did we actually have the freedom to developnew creative ways of working with young people or were we bound by what thestate wanted Youth Work, and by implication, young people, to be? The backdropfor this critical search conference was the proposed introduction of a national youthwork curriculum, much resisted by the youth work community in Scotland and inother parts of the United Kingdom. More recently, much to my own surprise I havefound myself asking the same question again. For Generation Y… Who is YouthWork For? This time around it is perhaps a more sophisticated motivation whichdrives me to seek out an answer but essentially the question remains the same. DoesYouth Work serve the interests of the dominant status quo prevailing in society at agiven time or does it challenge in a more democratic manner that which needs tobe challenged? In this paper I explore some of the issues which relate to my centralquestion and offer, not definitive answers, but possibilities based on developmentalmodels and perspectives which nurture positive change.

The past twenty years has seen an unprecedented restructuring of society and theinstitutions which make up society at the national and international level. Thecollapse of the youth labour market, detrimental changes in state provision foryoung people and a new form of social intensity has contributed to the rise of so-called troubled and troublesome youth. The popular images of hedonistic,problematic youth have contributed to what some commentators have argued is aform of ‘paedophobia’ – a fear of young people, (Waiton, 2007). More sympathetic

social policy constructions have focused on the need to challenge this perceivedyouth alienation by engaging with young people at all levels. Citizenship,Participation and Empowerment through positive social action, are now firmlyembedded in government discourse both nationally and globally but to what extentdo we actually make the leap from talk to action? Patterns of inequality may be lessvisible in a world of seductive packaged culture but the trends which divide us arethere if we scratch beneath the surface. The experience of poverty is a daily livedreality for almost a third of young people in Scotland. Minorities continue to suffer(mostly in silence) and young people are over-represented across the range ofoppression perpetuated, or at least unchallenged, by our ‘caring’ institutions.

A new form of intolerance is seen by many to be caused by the rupturing of the so-called Liberal consensus of the 20th century. Class division by another name stillexists in more subtle forms. The poor are constructed as ‘other’, Lister (2004) usingthe vocabulary of domination, Jones (1998). Refugees, asylum seekers, economicmigrants, people with mental health problems, child offenders are treated by many,as groups to be processed punitively. The commodification of services which serveyoung people is more prevalent across all social strata, not only in Scotland, butacross the new Europe. Adult perceptions of young people as hedonistic and lackingin ‘moral fibre’ abound at most levels of our society. The unprecedented accelerationof information technology and globalisation has brought with it a potential dividebetween young people and the moral majority. For many, the boundaries betweenvirtual and real are more blurred than ever before. Recent research published by theInstitute of Public Policy Research (IPPR, 2006) supports the proposition that‘adults have become estranged’, from the world of young people. It also highlightsnegative influences caused by the rise of teenage consumerism and social immobilityfor a significant number of young people in our society.

Popular Images of Young PeopleIn Scotland today we are experiencing a high level of scapegoating and stereotypingof young people as perhaps the new ‘moral underclass’, Levitas (1998). Thedominant adult attitude of “ned subculture” and “binge drinking”, “substancemisusing”, hedonistic youth is well embedded in our social reality. The youthproblem in reality is a failure of most adults to fully understand the daily livedexperience of young people today. In that respect it is an adult problem. The classicobservations of Cohen (1972) and the “folk devils” as a threat to the social order areas relevant today as they were almost four decades ago. This moral panicphenomenon is summarised in Griffin’s (2004) work:

“Youth is… treated as a key indicator of the state of the nation…: it is expected toreflect the cycle of booms and troughs in the economy; shifts in cultural values oversexuality, morality and family life; and changes in class relations, concepts ofnationhood, and in occupational structures. Young people are assumed to hold the keyto the nation’s future, and the treatment and management of ‘youth’ is expected to


78 Who is Youth Work for? Distortions and Possibilities

provide the solution to the nations ‘problems’, from’ drug abuse’, ‘hooliganism’ and‘teenage pregnancy’ to inner city riots”. Griffiin (2004, p10)

In many ways young people are set up to be a barometer for the negative social milieu whichis seen to be detrimental to society (see Brannen et al. 1994; Cote, 2002). In competing forscarce resources, jobs and social position we are perhaps witnessing classic ‘in-group’, ‘out-group’ behaviour. The ‘in-group’ will tend to exaggerate what it sees as it’s own positivefeatures, whilst the ‘out group’ will be discriminated against by the use of stereotypes andother blaming tactics. To some extent this may be the root of a great deal of discriminatorybehaviour by young people in Scotland. (see Sherif, 1961). These distortions lead to conflictbetween adults and young people not only within communities but in the power relationswhich influence the development of youth work provision. The concept of ‘status ambiguity’(Moore and Rosental, 1995; Coleman, 2004) describes the imbalance of power which candisadvantage young people and cause inequality between the generations:

“The question of ‘status ambiguity’ is a key one because of what it tells us about thebalance of power in the relationship between adults and young people. If theindividual’s status is ambiguous, and if his or her rights are not clearly defined, theninevitably he or she will lack the power to influence events and to take control of his orher life”. Coleman (2004 p228)

The discourse of fear and punitive measures to control young people is not just thepreserve of an uninformed minority but may actually be influencing planningstrategies across Scotland. A significant finding in research carried out (see Barber &Naulty, 2005) suggests that a great deal of planning and strategy response to youthneeds focuses upon the deficit model of young people as opposed to a moredevelopmental, democratic perspective. To deal with ‘out of control youth’ appearsto have a great political appeal for those responsible for the construction of provision.

Political InfluenceThere is little doubt that the modernisation agenda of New Labour in Scotland hasinfluenced the development of provision and response to young people. In someways this has been very positive, with a growing movement highlighting the needto take children and young people more seriously by enacting legislation (LocalGovernment Scotland Act, 2003) which requires all local authorities to consult withyoung people on matters seen to be important to them. The appointment of aChildren’s Rights Commissioner is also a major step forward. However, workingagainst this progression is the climate of fear ever present within planningstructures which claim to have the best interests of young people at heart.Historically we have seen the scapegoating of young people as the enemy to be dealtwith punitively, for example the mods, rockers, skinheads and punks were all seenas a threat to the social fabric of this country. We now see very similar patterns inresponse to the ‘hoodies’, neds and other assorted ‘underwolves’ within ourcommunities. There is something inherently flawed about government policywhich dictates how we construct our morality but in so many ways does not apply





these same standards to it’s own structure and the provision of services which claimto serve young people.

As a fieldworker working in peripheral housing estates I can remember howannoyed I felt when an over-liberal minded colleague would offer very tameresponses to local people facing nightmare scenarios with out of control youngpeople. There is a need to take very seriously the havoc caused by a small minorityof young people in communities. What is argued here is that some aspects ofpopulist government provision may be dealing more with symptoms than rootcauses. The Anti-Social Behaviour Orders are not primarily designed for dealingwith young people exclusively but the reality may be different for most people.Curfews, tagging and advanced surveillance techniques add to this ubiquitous fearof young people which although never wholly intentional has become the productof New Labour’s Third Way. There are very real dangers that some aspects of YouthWork in Scotland become more surveillance based than working with young peoplein a process driven, relationship based manner. Davies (2005a) summarises thispotential ‘disproportionality’ in current youth policy making:

“In the youth policy field what is crucially different from the 1960s is that today astrategy is being developed based on deliberately exploiting popular tensions andfrustrations – on playing directly on fear and prejudice. The result is to encourage blanketdemonising and dehumanising of a whole generational segment of the population byresort to, and then the widespread and continual recycling of, labels such as ‘yob’ and‘feral youth’. In order to turn the full weight of the state against these demons,disproportionate public and policy responses are then endorsed, which involve seriousdistortion of the operation of judicial and law enforcement procedures”. (ibid p7)

If youth work is to serve the needs of young people effectively it needs to develop amore effective challenge in most areas of social policy development. A more pro-active stance would highlight the fact that young people are more likely to be victimsof crime than perpetrators of criminal acts. Traditional discourse in areas of youthparticipation tends to focus upon the individualistic paradigm, where effectivelywhat is measured is the young person’s ability to make it through the maze ofopportunities. Less is said about the inability of organisational structures to engagewith methods that actually encourage participation. A growing populist consensusfavoured by politicians of all colours is that in our efforts to enable more effectiveparticipation we have overemphasised rights at the expense of responsibilities. Thefocus is therefore firmly embedded in our understanding of what constitutes a ‘goodcitizen’. Young people are perceived as ‘deficient citizens’ (Eden and Roker, 2002).Extensive longitudinal research carried out over a three year period examiningtransitions into citizenship reveal a much more positive picture with young peopletaking very seriously their responsibilities to community and society (Lister, Smith,Middleton, Cox, 2005 p33). Before exploring models of practice I would like to takea necessary deviation into the world of learning and briefly examine how bothintrinsic/extrinsic factors are likely to influence the readiness to participate.



Learning Models and the New IntelligenceThe methods and structuring necessary to create a new ethos in our work withyoung people must be focused on encouraging them to develop resilience, identityand motivation. This approach is highly dependant on the level of control orpersonal agency young people feel they have in their interaction with adults, andindeed with each other. This sense of control cannot be given to the young personin a transaction, it is the product of a range of opportunities a young person chooses(or not) to take up. Evans (2002) describes this area of learning as ‘bounded agency’and demonstrates through empirical research that young people perceive a sense ofcontrol which is limited by social and institutional factors:

“Young people are social actors moving in a social landscape. How they perceive thehorizons depends on where they stand in the landscape. The horizons change slowlyas they move. Sometimes opening up, sometimes closing down. Where they godepends on the pathways they see, choose, stumble across or clear for themselves, theterrain and elements they encounter. Their progress depends on what they feel it isimportant to spend time on, how well they are equipped, and the help they can call onwhen they need it, whether they go alone or together and how they engage with otherson the way”. Evans (2002 p2)

In a practical sense educators must develop new creative methodologies whichbolster young people’s capacities and nurture growth. The so-called ‘soft skills’development may be far more important than we realise. See Edwards (2003) andHarden et al, (2001). Social skills development is not new and we shouldacknowledge the transformative achievements by colleagues working in extremelydifficult situations. For many though, the subject dominates the learning experienceand creates agendas based upon winners and losers. Huskins (1996 p8) offers amuch used model for developing social learning in an experiential manner:

• Self awareness/self-esteem (how you feel about yourself)• Communication skills (communicating effectively)• Interpersonal skills (getting on with others)• Exploring and managing feelings (aware of, and open about, feelings)• Understanding and identifying with others (feeling as others do)• Values development (what is right and wrong)• Problem solving (solving problems)• Negotiation skills (agreeing decisions with others)• Action planning (planning ahead)• Reviewing skills (learning from experience)

Over the past decade many have been critical of methods which encourage anexploration of self, seeing this pursuit as individualistic and in many ways theantithesis of good youth work. The point I would like to make is based upon thedistinction between individualism and individuation. Individualism has aneconomic connotation based upon personal survival at all costs. Individuation has a



much more humanistic, life enhancing, sense of other, focus. Both learners andeducators within diverse youth work contexts need to explore the dynamics of self-concept and share what this means in practical ways towards effective individuation.This will require methods which encourage a strong self-concept.

At its simplest the self-concept contains three inter-related dimensions:

1. The Cognitive (How we think)2. The Affective (How we feel)3. The Behavioural (What we do)

Understanding the young person’s terms of reference is critical if we are to makeany kind of progress. The concept of ‘self efficacy’ describes a process which isconcerned with how the learner (and educator) construes their own capabilities,their beliefs and the control they feel they can exercise over their lives. We knowwith some certainty that being able to cope with the inevitable impediments tolearning is a core skill we need to develop if we are to learn effectively. It is worthstressing that the nurturing of self-efficacy is not confined to the informal learningcontext, as Bandura (1994) asserts:

“The task of creating learning environments conducive to development of cognitiveskills rests heavily on the talents and self-efficacy of teachers. Those who are skilledhave a high sense of efficacy about their teaching capabilities can motivate theirstudents and enhance their cognitive development”. (p9)

It is clear that developing this readiness to learn is critical in our work. We may havelittle real influence over the learner’s home environment, cultural influence andpressures from peers and family. We do however contribute significantly to thelearners’ ability to grow the ‘protective factors’ needed to sustain learning.Resilience refers to the young person’s ability to ‘bounce back’ from adversitywhich he or she may face in their everyday life. Newman (2002 p5) observes thatthe most powerful resilience-promoting factor in young people is the attitude andbehaviour of parents. A supportive relationship between educator and learner mustgo beyond a subject orientation and towards a more capacity building paradigm.“The recognition that adversities can be overcome is crucial in developing anapproach to life that is active rather than passive, and optimistic rather thanpessimistic.” (ibid p5). Knowledge of the dispositional and situational factors whichinfluence the level of optimism and pessimism expressed by young people is hugelyunder-rated in my opinion.

Learning and the Influence of Emotional IntelligenceThe development of emotional intelligence theory dates back to the early 1940’swith pioneering work carried out by David Weschler and others, exploring non-intellective elements of intelligence i.e. the affective, personal and social influences.This belief in multiple intelligence was to challenge the narrow cognitive constructprevailing at the time. One contemporary theorist from a popular and academic



perspective is Daniel Goleman (1996). Goleman summarises the essential elementsof emotional intelligence thus:

• Self-awareness… knowing your emotions, recognising feelings as theyoccur, and discriminating between them.

• Mood management… handling feelings so they are relevant to the currentsituation and you react appropriately.

• Self-motivation… “gathering up” your feelings and directing yourselftowards a goal, despite self-doubt, inertia, and impulsiveness.

• Empathy… recognising feelings in others and tuning into their verbal andnon-verbal cues.

• Managing relationships… handling interpersonal interaction, conflictresolution, and negotiations.

The learning opportunities which underpin the genuine participation of youngpeople are, as we have seen, contingent upon a strong sense of self. Goleman’sfindings are highly consistent with this proposition. For Goleman, understandinghow to learn is an important pre-requisite in effective learning. The ingredients forthis understanding are described as follows:

1. Confidence2. Curiosity3. Intentionality4. Self-control5. Relatedness6. Capacity to communicate7. Ability to co-operate

This understanding of the positive human dynamic lies at the heart of genuineyouth involvement and active learning. For too long we have been engaged inpractices which attempt to adultise young people. Getting them to conform, or fitin, has been the priority we have failed to truthfully acknowledge.

Davies (2005 p7b) offers a series of questions (and in the original work…responses) to open up a potentially critical debate for authentic work with youngpeople. This is summarised below:

• Have young people chosen to become involved – is their engagementvoluntary?

• Is the practice proactively seeking to tip balances of power in youngpeople’s favour?

• Are young people perceived and received as young people rather than,as a requirement, through the filter of a range of adult-imposed labels?

• Is the practice starting where young people are starting – particularlywith their expectation that they will be able to relax, meet friends andhave fun?



• Is a key focus of the practice on the young person as an individual?• Is the practice respectful of and actively responsive to young people’s

peer networks?• Is the practice respectful of and actively responsive to young people’s

wider community and cultural identities and, where young peoplechoose, is it seeking to help them strengthen these?

• Is the practice seeking to go beyond where young people start, inparticular by encouraging them to be outward looking, critical and creativein their responses to their experience and the world around them?

• Is the practice concerned with how young people feel and as well as withwhat they know and can do?

Making Sense of EngagementAt the heart of effective Youth Work practice is being able to make sense of thecompeting pressures you will face as a practitioner. Organisations expect a highlevel of professionalism from youth workers and adherence to values which aresometimes explicit but mostly less so. The culture of ‘risk aversion’ andmeasurement dominates the youth work landscape, whilst the demands fromyoung people in many ways come from a completely different set of expectations.Figure 1 opposite encapsulates my own thinking in this area.

Top-Down PressuresThis area of the model focuses on the structural and societal pressures facing youngpeople and those who work with them. Recent empirical research carried out byBarber and Naulty (2005) suggests that top-down, structural understanding ofyoung people is still largely driven by fear and the need to control.

Adultising… refers to behaviour by adults who do not fully accept young peopleas they are. Instead there are great efforts (sometimes overt, sometimesmanipulative, paternalistic and hidden) which seek to accept young people onlyif they mimic ‘responsible’ adult values and behaviour. A great deal of thewindow dressing and politically populist programmes subscribe to this approach.

Control… refers to the much held view that young people must be kept incheck at all costs if social order is to remain intact. A spectrum of control rangesfrom soft socialisation in institutions such as the school and the family unitthrough to more coercive tactics by the more negative elements of state control.

Fears… refers to the socially constructed perception of youth as synonymouswith rebellion and deviancy. Fear of young people is a global phenomenon, quiteoften finding expression in moral panics in society and community.

Bottom-Up PressuresThis area describes the aspirational pressures exhibited by young people in theprocess of engagement.



Identity – Finding Self, Being Self… refers to the need for young people todevelop their own identity internally and through social interaction with othersin a diverse range of contexts.

Risk Taking… The possibility of challenging the status quo and the ‘wisdom’of adults is a fundamental part of being young. How this finds expression is amatter of debate. Those working with young people need to understand thisprinciple if they are to relate effectively.

Developing Capacities… proposes that young people are in a state oftransition; their needs, wants and capabilities in a high state of flux. Recognitionthat young people need emotional and physical space to work this through withadults and peers who respond congruently is essential.

The Engagement ZoneThis is the term for the dynamic context where adults engage and interact withyoung people and structure meets personal agency. The zone is the place for

Figure 1 THE TB (Top-Down/Bottom Up) MODEL OF YOUTHENGAGEMENT



dialogue, compromise, insight and a focus on possibility. In this area there will beexpression of anger, cynicism, tokenism, humour, creativity and positive change.Some adults and young people will leave the zone when they feel that their needsare not met; some will remain and continue to struggle optimistically in the hopethat change can be achieved.

The TB engagement model is a representation of complex processes but it is hopedthat those committed to authentic work with young can use it as a prompt fordiscussion and dialogue. Not all top-down pressures are negative. In fact somestructural forces can, in the right context, be productive and developmental. Thedemands from bottom up similarly cannot be assumed to be positive and altruistic.The pressures from young people in some ways may be unrealistic, unattainableand naïve. What remains in the zone is the commitment to listening and dialoguebetween adults and young people.

In some ways there is a need to institutionalize genuine engagement with youngpeople. For too long we have been attracted to the novelty of one-off events whichpromote and encourage the youth voice but in fact fail to sustain this activity as partof the mainstream. Engagement must be seen as a core activity which permeatespolicy and practice at all levels. Kirby, et al (2003 p57) offer a useful benchmark forthis way of working based on their own extensive research. Their work issummarised below:

Institutionalizing ParticipationThere are a number of stages that organisations go through when buildingparticipatory cultures, although this is complex and dynamic, rather than alinear process. These stages are described as unfreeze; catalyse, internaliseand institutionalize.

Unfreeze: The first challenge is to unfreeze or unblock existing attitudes,procedures and styles of working. Different factors herald the need tochange, including external pressures (government agenda; fundingrequirement) or internal drives (professional belief; exposure toparticipatory practice). It may be necessary to highlight the need for change,although few organisations changed as a result of research evidence. It isvaluable to demonstrate links between participation and policy initiatives.

Catalyse:Once individuals and organisations have begun to see the need forchange there are a number of factors that can help this to take-off. Thisincludes identifying existing champions or, if necessary, establishing newchampions of participation. Ultimately their role is to support change acrossthe organisation rather than relying on these individuals to do allparticipation work. Senior management support is a key catalyst forinstitutionalising participation; they create the climate that allows change totake place across the organisation and they can ensure young people’s ideas



are acted upon. It is important to develop a vision for children and youngpeople’s participation, and set this against an understanding of the cultureand politics of the organization. Change needs some organisation andplanning, while remaining flexible and manageable. Involving children andyoung people early helps to ensure plans are child/youth focused. Theamount of funding for participation varies across agencies; those servicesworking most with children and young people on a daily basis appear to haveleast dedicated funding to develop this work. There is a danger that fundingis focused on creating an elite workforce of participation workers.

Internalise: Internalising change, and ensuring it is sustainable, involvescommunicating and developing a shared vision and understanding ofparticipation. Putting time and resources into building staff capacity isessential, including – sufficient staffing and time, targeted recruitment, on-going training, and opportunities to discuss practice and experiment and intomotivating and celebrating achievements. Inevitable conflicts will need to beresolved. Reflection and evaluation helps to ensure organisations develop thelearning culture needed to undergo change.

Institutionalize: In order to ensure participation is institutionalised it willbe necessary to mainstream practice. This might include developing internalpolicy and guidance, and agreed standards.

This paper has attempted to draw together critical observations, style and stanceprerequisites for effective engagement with young people as well as models whichseek to explain phenomena influencing participation. It is now time to close thediscussion by returning to the central question posed at the outset… Who is YouthWork For?

ConclusionsIn finally developing a view on Who Youth Work Is For it might be useful toapproach the question from the inverse…Who It Is Not For? It is not for those whoseek to control and manipulate young people. It is not for those who are notprepared to listen to young people or to trust them. It is not for those who focusexclusively on problems as opposed to possibilities. As I write, a major consultationis underway to establish a National Youth Work Strategy for Scotland. Thepromotion and distribution by the Scottish Executive and leading youth workpartnerships has been impressive. It is vital that the insights developed are translatedinto action supported by real investment and radical forward planning. This paperhas highlighted the patterns of inequality which most young people face to varyingdegrees. The access opportunities for young people are dominated by a culture offear and intolerance which is wholly unacceptable in a 21st century Scotland. Thevast potential and creativity which exists in the youth population of Scotland liesdormant until we find the means to liberate the institutions, organisations andpractice of those who claim to serve our youth.

Who is Youth Work for? Distortions and Possibilities


88

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barber, T. and Naulty, M. (2005) Your Place or Mine. A research study exploring young people’sparticipation in community planning. Dundee: University of Dundee.

Bandura, A. (2004) Self efficacy. In: www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/BanEncy.html

Brannen, J., Dodd, K., Oakley, A. and Storey, A. (1994) Young People, Health and Family Life.Buckingham: Open University Press.

Cohen, S. (1972) Folk Devils and Moral Panics. London. University Of London Press.

Coleman, J (2004) In Youth in Society. 2nd Edition. London: Sage Publications.

Côté, J. (2002) The Role of Identity Capital in the Transition to Adulthood: The IndividualizationThesis Examined. Journal of Youth Studies, 5(2), p117-134.

Davies, B. (2005a) Threatening Youth Revisited: Youth Policies Under New Labour. The encyclopaedia ofinformal education. www.infed.org/archives/bernard_davies/revisiting_threatening_youth.htm.

Davies, B. (2005b) Youth Work: A Manifesto for Our Times. Reprinted From Youth & Policy. Number88. Leicester: NYA.

Eden, K And Roker, D (2002) ‘Doing Something’. Young People As Social Actors. Leicester: Youth WorkPress.

Edwards, L. (2003) In Promoting Young People’s Wellbeing: A Review of Research on EmotionalHealth. Glasgow: SCRE Centre.

Evans, K.M. (2002) Young Adults And Their Sense Of Control. Research Briefing Paper Number 2.Brighton: ESRC.

Goleman, D. (1996) Emotional Intelligence. Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. London: BloomsburyPublishing.

Griffin, C. (2004) Representations of the Young. London: In: Youth in Society. Sage Publications.

Harden, Et Al. (2001) In Promoting Young People’s Wellbeing: A Review Of Research On EmotionalHealth. Glasgow: SCRE Centre.

Huskins, J. (1996) Quality Work With Young People. London: Youth Clubs UK.

IPPR. Margo, J., Dixon, M., Pearce, N., Reed, H. (2006) Freedom’s Orphans: Raising youth in achanging world. London: IPPR Publications.

Jones, C. (1998) ‘Setting the Context: Race, Class and Social Violence’, in Lavalette, M., Penketh, L. andJones, C. (eds) Anti-Racism and Social Welfare, Aldershot: Ashgate: p5-26.

Moore, S. and Rosenthal, D. (1995). Sexuality in Adolescence. London: Routledge.

Kirby, P., Lanyon, C., Cronin, K., Sinclair, R. (2003) Research Report. Building a Culture ofParticipation. Involving children and young people in policy, service planning, delivery and evaluation.

Nottingham: DfES Publications.

Levitas, R. (2005) The Inclusive Society (Second Edition), London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lister, R. (2004) Poverty, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Lister, R., Smith, N., Middleton, S., Cox, L. (2005) In: BARRY, M (ed) (2005) Youth Policy and SocialInclusion. Critical Debates with Young People. Oxfordshire. Routledge.

Newman, T. et al (2002) Transitions in the lives of children and young people: resilience factors.Edinburgh: Scottish Executive. Interchange.

Sherif, M. et al. (1961) Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation. The Robbers Cave Experiment. Universityof Oklahoma.

Waiton, S. (2001) Scared of the Kids. Leicester: Perpetuity Press.

Waiton, S. (2007) Cotton Wool Kids. Glasgow, Generation Youth Issues Conference Bulletin.


89THINK PIECE

THE ROOTS OF ‘PAEDOPHOBIA’

Stuart Waiton and Simon Knight

A new report, Freedom’s Orphans, shows that adults are afraid to challengechildren. But its proposed solutions would make matters worse argue Stuart Waitonand Simon Knight.

There is a scene in Dylan Thomas’ ‘Under Milk Wood’ where the characterCaptain Cat, an old blind sea Captain, stands at his front door listening to the street.From what he can hear he can identify everybody, adults and children alike, byname. How many of us, even with our sight intact, could claim to have the samecloseness with our own communities? A new report from the Institute of PublicPolicy Research (IPPR), Freedom’s Orphans: Raising Youth in a Changing Worldidentifies a world where in today’s Britain not only are adults unlikely to know andinteract with local children and young people but are actually afraid of doing so.

The report, based on comparative interviews with adults in a number of Europeancountries, found that whereas in Germany, Spain and Italy, over half therespondents said they would intervene if they saw a group of 14-year oldsvandalising a bus shelter, in the UK only 34 per cent said they would do something.This compared most starkly with results in Germany, where 65 per cent, or almosttwice as many adults, said they would try to stop the vandals.

These findings reflect our experiences in our respective fields: Stuart, a universitylecturer teaching a criminology course and Simon, who manages a communityproject addressing concern about youth disorder. We have both also carried out ourown PhD research projects into the changing nature of community perceptions ofchildren and young people.

Part of the reason for Britain’s disparity with the rest of Europe, Freedom’sOrphans argues, is that here adults appear to be more nervous about intervening,worried that their actions could lead to physical violence, verbal abuse orsubsequent reprisals. This fear of children and young people also appears to be onthe increase. Compared to 1992, nearly twice as many people today said that youngpeople hanging about, rather than noisy neighbours, was something they wouldcomplain about.

Where this report is useful is that rather than providing a myopic focus onchildren’s behaviour, it looks at the role of adults in society. It asks what adultswould do to stop misbehaving young people, but also analyses adult relationshipsand engagement with children on a day-to-day level.


90 THINK PIECE

Compared with other European countries for example, Julia Margot of the IPPRbelieves that here, ‘adults are less likely to socialise with children in the evenings’1.We don’t have a culture of children hanging out where adults socialise, in bars, cafesor town centres, so are less inclined, she argues, to get used to engaging and dealingwith young people.

This certainly rings true. From occasional trips abroad to places like Spain, it isoften surprising to see how children and young people are much more part of thepublic environment than they are in Britain. In Scotland we often find that Italianand Greek restaurants have a more relaxed attitude to children than do their localcounterparts, perhaps because of the more traditional nature of family life in thosecountries. That’s not to say that they allow children to run around as they please,but rather that they are more comfortable in relating to them and in playing a moreactive role to control their behaviour. This compares favourably with many Scottishrestaurants where you sense a certain tension when your children leave their seats,only finally to be told that ‘health and safety’ regulations mean that the childrenmust sit still.

In Hamilton, where Stuart carried out his research for his book Scared of the Kids?,it was also the case that those adults who were involved in running activities foryoung people had a far more positive view of children than many of the other adultsin the area. Interestingly, in his own neighbourhood on Glasgow’s south side, theonly ‘strange’ adult who has ever stopped and talked to one of his children turnedout to be an elderly scout leader. To some extent it appears that unless you have an‘official’ role with children they are off-limits.

In the IPPR press release, the changes to adult-child relations, the increased fear ofyoung people and the disconnection of generations are all put down to broadchanges in the family, local communities and the economy. There are real changesin childhood, they argue, but ‘paedophobia’, or the fear of children, ‘makesthings worse’.

This all sounds reasonable enough. Society is more fragmented, we have fewerconnections with society as a whole and with other individuals in particular, andchildhood has to a large extent become privatised. Ironically, at a time when ‘other’adults are drifting into the background, parents are spending more time with theirown children than before.

However, whether or not this would necessarily result in adults becoming morefrightened of young people and less prepared to engage with them remains unclear.Perhaps the other European countries under study have remained more ‘solid’,more traditional and therefore more spontaneously engaged with children. But thisis only half the story, we also need to look at the role that policy, professionals andpoliticians have played in creating the culture of ‘paedophobia’.


91THINK PIECE

John, one of Stuart’s colleagues and caretaker in a community centre, has recentlybeen cleared in court of assaulting a teenage boy who he escorted out of a youthcentre. John is now frightened to do his job and in a sense has become frightened,not of children as such, but of the laws and policies that encourage parents to ‘makea claim’, that see the police carry the case to court and which left John isolated ashis union refused to support him.

A sociologist we know tells us in no uncertain terms that he wouldn’t go near ayoung child today because of ‘what people might think’. Nor will he meet withfemale students at his university unless his office door is left open. This ispaedophobia of a different sort – and not one that has been brought on simply bychanges in the economy or the community.

Similarly, where has the idea that approaching young people could endanger youcome from? This may have developed partly because of the growing distance thatexists between adults and young people. It may even be, as the IPPR reportsuggests, that young people are more likely to misbehave because adults no longerintervene. But let’s face it, whether the behaviour of children is worse or not, thisis the impression that most people have, because for at least a decade politicianshave played on people’s insecurities about ‘yobs’ and ‘neds’.

Simon manages a youth work project funded by the Scottish Executive to addressconcerns about anti-social behaviour and youth disorder. He found that developingreal responses to issues that exist primarily at a perceptual level actually ran therisk of reinforcing those disproportionate perceptions thereby increasingcommunity concern.

The local neighbourhood police had an interesting take on the conundrum.Evaluated by the number of telephone calls complaining about young people theyreceived, the police would often respond to calls only to find the complaint wasabout children playing in the street outside their own homes. One Officersuggested tackling the problem by evicting the six most prolific adult callers ratherthan the kids who were generally well behaved.

Luckily there was scope within the project to find ways of addressing perceptionstoo. Various initiatives were developed that encouraged communities to re-engageat an organic level2. Intergenerational work, as it was termed, pursued re-establishing connections between young and old. Doing so resulted in lesssuspicious responses by adults when groups of young people were observed.Encouraging adults to approach young people and take issue with them if they arestepping out of line was the next logical step. But it seems that while this soundssensible and an approach employed during halcyon by-gone-eras, key officials havelittle stomach for local adults dealing with mischief making youth.


92 THINK PIECE

It is worth noting that if children are literally out of the control of adults due to alack of contact, then the pressures that were brought to bare in the past throughsocialisation will no longer apply. With vastly reduced child/adult interaction thereis no mechanism for the transmission of culturally established norms of behaviouror spontaneous force for ensuring compliance. Is it any surprise that some childrenare ‘out of control’?

Adults intervening when young people misbehave is, quite frankly, no longer ‘thedone thing’ – a message promoted by politicians, housing officers, ASBOs, andimplied by the ‘pick up the phone’ advice from Strathclyde Police. For example, ata recent conference Stuart attended on the issue of antisocial behaviour, Bill Pitt(the Home Office ASBO guru who is sent round the country to promote ASBOlegislation) told a story about how he saw a young man charge past an old lady toget on a bus, knocking her to the ground.

He challenged the young man about his behaviour. Asked if that meant he wouldsuggest to other adults that they too should be more active when young people areantisocial. “No”, said Pitt. It appears that Big Bill can be active, but for the‘unconfident community’, as he describes them, it is the state in the form of thelocal officials who must act.

Having started by raising the important issue of adults not being prepared tointervene to regulate young people’s behaviour, the IPPR report disappointinglymakes suggestions that will make matters worse. It notes, citing rather datedresearch based on young people in the 1970s and 80s, that teenagers who spendmore time with their friends than their parents, and those who are less likely to beinvolved in structured youth activities rather than unstructured youth clubs, aremore likely to be involved in crime and violence. Other indicators of ‘problems’,like depression, being single or divorced, living in social housing, and having noqualifications, are also linked to children who were not involved in structuredyouth activities. However, all the percentages for these apparent problems werenoticeably low, ranging from two to five per cent in all the above examples. It is alsounclear whether this takes account of other obvious ‘causes’ for these differences,like class.

The conclusion the authors draw is that the solution is an increase in structuredactivities. They propose that all secondary-school children should be forced toparticipate in at least two hours of structured extracurricular activities per week,with parents who refuse to sanction this being fined.

Ignoring the authoritarian aspect of this proposal for a moment, it is wrong toassume that this will do anything to overcome the problems of crime and behaviourin society, even if some kids do benefit from such activity. This proposal not onlydoes nothing to solve the problem of the disconnection between adults and


93THINK PIECE

children, it makes it worse. It not only ignores the wider problem of deactivatedadults, but potentially further endorses the existing belief that relating to otherpeople’s children is not the business of other adults but of experts. It also endorsesthe notion that young people who are out unsupervised are a potential problem, orat least they will be in the future, thus enhancing, rather than challenging, the‘paedophobia’ they are concerned about.

It seems that the authors of Freedom’s Orphans are as frightened of community adultstaking action in their own area as some people seem to be of children.

Ironically, with the increasing suspicion towards adults who volunteer to work withyoung people, it is hard to know who will ‘be allowed’ to staff all these structuredyouth activities proposed by the IPPR. In the past local children would beconsidered the responsibility of the whole community not a select few officiallysanctioned and vetted adults. In fact, at a national conference that we organised in2005, Frank Furedi noted that shared childcare was the basis of community.3

Simon has interviewed over 100 older people about their own childhoodrelationships with adults. Ken’s (1939) reminiscences are common to many; “WellI was always brought up to be respectful, of everybody. I don’t specificallyremember other people necessarily having to discipline me. But if they had of done,then I would have just treated it like everything else. You would have expected it tohappen. My mother presumably would have been happy for anybody to disciplineme, ’cause it would have been less for her to do.” This level of adult solidarity, thatpermits communities to ‘consume their own smoke’, without recourse to stateofficials, is impossible to legislate for. The spontaneous nature of theseinterpersonal relations can only ever be informal.

Additionally, by promoting the idea that children are better off either with theirparents or at least being with other adults in a structured environment, rather thanwith their friends, this report runs the risk of de-socialising and even infantilisingyoung people further. Children are already more inclined to be what some havetermed ‘cotton-wool kids’. Spending more time with their parents and insupervised adult company than ever before, and a decreasing amount of time freelyengaging with other young people, will only exacerbate that trend.4

This is not to argue that young people should have the ‘right’ to roam free, butrather that for the development of communities we need children to become morepublic, not less so, and adults to see young people not as someone else’s problembut as public property.

The authors of Freedom’s Orphans, like the present government, are blind to thepotential within ordinary adults actively to engage with young people, preferringinstead a ‘state’ solution, with the further regulation of young people (and non-


94 THINK PIECE

participating parents) as the answer. But this approach ultimately helps toundermine the process of socialising young people, which must involve freeengagement between adults and children.

A final note in relation to the fear that exists of young people today. It is wrong forpeople to think that most young people, even those behaving badly, will attack youwhen you intervene. A few will, and many more may tell you where to go. But thatdoesn’t mean we shouldn’t intervene, rather it makes it all the more important thatwe should. Other adults may not back you; some parents will defend their childrenrather than support your actions. But it is only in the process of trying to resolvethis ourselves that we can help develop the communities we live in.

REFERENCES

1. British adults ‘fear youngsters’, BBC News, 22 October 20062. http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialReports/meetingsParliament/or-05/

sor0622-02.htm#Col182173. See, Cotton Wool Kids, conference bulletin, Generation: Youth Issues.4. James Youniss makes a very useful contribution to this discussion, see Youniss, J (1980). Parents and

Peers in Social Development- a Sullivian-Piaget Perspective. London: University of Chicago Press

Title: Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of RaunchCulture

Author: Ariel Levy

Date and Publisher: Pocket Books: London 2006

ISBN: 1 41652638 2Reviewer Akwugo Emejulu

Reading Ariel Levy’s lively journalistic polemic reminds me of my favouriteheadline from the satirical online newspaper The Onion: ‘Women NowEmpowered by Everything a Woman Does’. In this ‘article’ the paper reports thatthrough the mundane acts of living and consuming women are in a constant stateof empowerment. Women, it seems, have thrown off the yoke of gender-basedoppression because we can acquire an obscene number of shoes, gossip with friendsabout sex and eat lunch by ourselves. Because of our consumer lifestyles there is noneed to fight for equal pay or abortion rights because everything a woman does, nomatter how apolitical or harmful to the interests of women, can be defined asliberation. As The Onion shrewdly notes, ‘Not every woman can become aphysicist… although these actions are incredible, they marginalize the majority ofwomen who are unable to, or just don’t particularly care to, achieve such things.Fortunately… a new strain of feminism has emerged in which mundane activitiesare championed as proud, bold assertions of independence from oppressivepatriarchal hegemony.’

In a sense Levy’s all too short book, Female Chauvinist Pigs, is an extendedexamination of this ‘new strain of feminism’. Levy’s premise is three-fold: to exploreand understand the popularity of what she calls ‘raunch culture’, to understand howraunch culture relates to some kind of ironic, tongue-in-cheek post-feminism and toassess the impact raunch culture has on our ideas about female sexuality and femalesexual expression. Mercifully steering clear of clichés but also injecting some wryasides and venom into her prose, Levy attacks what she sees as consumerism andmisogyny masquerading as feminism. Indeed she states ‘Why is this the ‘newfeminism’ and not what it looks like: the old objectification’ (p81)?

What is so refreshing about this text is that the author has made a real effort to lookat the rise of raunch culture from a philosophical, historical and pop culturalperspective. This text is not some kind of wagging-finger at female sexualexpression but a genuine attempt to understand how second-wave feminism hasbeen misunderstood, diluted and corrupted by consumerism and how the idea ofhealthy female sexual expression has been distorted as a result. Levy begins in theclassic journalistic style by trailing around with a TV crew whose job is get youngwomen to flash or simulate sex for the cameras so these images can be editedtogether on a series of DVDs called Girls Gone Wild and sold on the internet for


95Book Reviews

$19.99. The women’s reward for exposing themselves is a hat or a T-shirt. Thewillingness of women to participate in front of the camera by stripping and behindthe scenes in the production of Girls Gone Wild is what Levy is interested inexploring; the fact that all the women involved believe their participation isempowering is what Levy finds disturbing.

The rise of raunch culture—the interweaving of pornographic imagery of womeninto popular culture—Levy puts down to the commodification of two separateliberation movements: feminism and the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s.Her discussion about the historical underpinning of raunch culture is one of Levy’sstrongest chapters because it approaches the well worn subject of sexuality andfeminism in a different light. Raunch culture, she argues, is the contradictory residueof the conflicts between sex radicals and feminists. Whilst both groups argued forfreedom to express sexual preferences and desires, sex radicals and feminists partedcompany on what precisely constituted healthy sexual expression. For sex radicals,sexual expression was essentially apolitical; what mattered was that participation wasvoluntary and women and men were gratified. For feminists however, sexualexpression is a politicised activity and the way women were often depicted andtreated by sex radicals, they argued, was inherently misogynistic. This unresolveddebate about sex, power and gratification is manifested as raunch culture. ‘People areignoring the contradictions of the past…and putting various, conflicting ideologiestogether to form one incoherent brand of raunch feminism’. (p74).

This raunch feminism is the justification for just about any kind of sexualexpression women engage in whether it is fulfilling, empowering, sleazy orpotentially damaging. Again, the strength of Levy’s text is that she does notcondemn the women she interviews for participating in all this raunchy activity,she’s more exasperated with our immature culture that is scared of human sexualityin general and female sexual freedom in particular. Commenting on the failure ofimagination of the female organisers of CAKE parties that are ostensibly aboutredefining female sexual fantasies but seem only to duplicate clichéd male fantasiesabout women Levy fumes:

How do you publicly express the concept ‘sexy’ without falling back on theold hot-chicks-in-panties formula? […] They haven’t yet found a way toenact the redefinition they are advocating, so they are wishing for feministjustification where none exists. The truth is that the new conception ofraunch culture as the path to liberation rather than oppression is aconvenient (and lucrative) fantasy with nothing to back it up. (p82).

So why do women help produce the soft-porn DVDs of Girls GoneWild or organiseand participate in CAKE parties? Levy is quite blunt in her analysis: they are FemaleChauvinist Pigs. To put it in another more brutal way, these women are Uncle Toms.Levy’s exploration of the women who objectify and demean other women should be


96 Book Reviews

a wake up call for anyone who happily uses the term ‘post-feminist’. FemaleChauvinist Pigs (FCPs) are women who hate their femaleness and seek to mock anddemean other women in order to gain power, status and privilege in a patriarchalsociety. By acting like a man—getting a lap dance, watching other women strip,watching porn—FCPs alienate their womanhood, gain favour with powerful men(or men who are perceived to be powerful) and become the female exception to ruleof weakness that is thought to be embodied in womanhood.

It is in her analysis of FCPs that Levy’s text shines. By adopting the label of the‘exceptional woman’ who disdains women and what we are meant to represent, itis the FCPs who lose out in the end. ‘You may be getting ahead in some way…butyou are simultaneously reifying the system that traps you’ (p106). By constantlydenying their womanhood by trying to be like a man FCPs, paradoxically, aremaking it more difficult to obtain what they desperately want: power and respect.‘As long as womanhood is thought of as something to escape from, something lessthan manhood, you will be thought less of, too’. (p112).

In the end, Levy packs a mighty punch in just over 200 pages as she skips happilyfrom discussing the fracturing of second-wave feminism in the early 1980s to thepostmodernist re-interpretation of porn in academe in the 1990s to assessingdepoliticisation of the lesbian community in New York City and San Francisco in2004. To my knowledge this is one of the first non-academic texts to be written thatopenly questions the values underpinning post-feminism but does not wish us toreturn to some kind of misguided rose-tinted view of second-wave feminism of the1970s. Levy’s desire for us to grapple with the complexity of human sexuality, tofind new, non-oppressive ways for women to be able to express ourselves sexuallyis crucial to building a culture of respect and liberation where individuals are ableto express a full range of emotions without falling back on actions that limit anddegrade our humanity.


97Book Reviews


98


99Contributors

NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Dr K H McCulloch, is a Lecturer in Community Education at the University ofEdinburgh, and has been professionally involved with youth work since 1973. Heworked in local authority community education services prior to taking up anacademic career, and his interests include outdoor education, professional ethicsand education for citizenship.

Neil Hall is a Lecturer in the School of Social Sciences at University of WesternSydney, Australia. He is equally passionate about social justice, youth participationand rugby union. He is currently completing his doctoral thesis focusing on youngmales, sports and civic engagement.

Judith Bessant is Professor of Sociology and Youth Studies at RMIT University,Melbourne Australia. She has authored or co-authored many books MakingGroups Work (1996), Discovering Risk (2005), Abuse of Trust (2006), TalkingPolicy (2006) and Sociology Australia (1999; 2003; 2007) Criminology: A Criticalintroduction (2007) and When the Experts Disagree (forthcoming).

Dr. Terry Barber, is Lecturer in the Faculty of Education & Social Work at theUniversity of Dundee, Scotland.

Pat Henry is a Lecturer in Community Youth Work at the University of Ulster.Prior to taking up an academic career he was a professionally qualified CommunityYouth Work practitioner for 22 years working for the local Education and LibraryBoard. His teaching, research and work interests include person centredgroupwork, young people and mental health and encouraging adult reurners inHigher Education.

Eliz McArdle is currently Team Leader of the gender Equality unit in YouthAction Northern Ireland, a voluntary development agency for young people. Shepreviously worked in the Community Youth Work Team at the University of Ulsterin teaching, research and course design.

Dr. Caryl Sibbett is a Lecturer in the School of Education at Queen’s University,Belfast and she has a keen interest in mental health issues, person centredcounselling and art therapy.

Stuart Waiton and Simon Knight are directors of Generation: Youth Issues. Thegroup has launched a campaign to encourage adults to intervene with young peopleand support others who do so. For more information, contact: Email:[email protected].


100 Contributors

NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The Scottish Youth Issues Journal:• Provides a forum for the critical debate of youth issues.• Seeks to ensure a variety of opinions and perspectives to express the range ofpolicy and research contexts within which youth issues emerge.

• Recognises the centrality of theory and reflective practice to thedevelopment of academic and professional understanding.

• Encourages innovative work which extends beyond conventional approachesto academic writing and presentation.

The Scottish Youth Issues Journal seeks papers for publication which:• Focus on analysis rather than description.• Consider themes of relevance to youth issues in Scotland, though they maydraw upon experiences from elsewhere.

• Are written in a non-discriminatory style.• concentrate on clarity, avoid unnecessary and unexplained jargon, and use awriting style accessible to an international audience.

• Offer a clear theoretical rationale for the topic.• Ensure that the work discussed is understandable to a range of academicresearchers, policy makers and practitioners.

Contributions are welcome from outside, as well as within, Scotland.

ContributorsThe board welcomes contributions in the following items:Articles: between 4000 and 6000 words in length.Research Reports: between 4000 and 6000 words.Policy Reviews: between 1000 and 2000 words.Critical Comments: on articles previously published, between 500 and 1000 words.Book Reviews: between 500 and 1000 words.Think Pieces: between 500 and 1000 words.Conversations: between 500 and 1000 words.

Submissions will be read by a member of the Editorial Board, before beingsubmitted to a system of blind refereeing by two external assessors.

Format• Articles should be submitted on disk written in Word for Windows (IBM orApple compatible) together with a hard copy.

• The text should be one-and-a-half spacing with left hand margins of 1.5inches (4cm). There should be double-spacing between paragraphs.

• Figures, tables and acknowledgments should be on separate sheets, withtheir approximate position indicated in the text margin. Illustrations andgraphs should be to ‘camera ready’ copy standard. Drawings should be insharp black on white paper.

QuotationsPlease indent all quotations of fifty words or more and in these cases eliminatequotation marks. In general, use single quotes (‘...’) with double quotes (“...”) forquotations within quotations.

ItalicPlease use italic type for the titles of books and periodicals.

Notes and ReferencesNotes and references should normally be given, in alphabetical order by author, atthe end of the article. In citing references please use the American PsychlociologicalAssocaition (APA) system for books and articles. Bibliographical references in thetext should quote the author’s name and date of publication as follows (Johnstone,1999). Articles not submitted in the appropriate format will be returned to theauthor before being sent to referees.

CopyrightIndividual authors are responsible for ideas and opinions expressed in their articlesand for obtaining the necessary copyright. Articles are accepted on theunderstanding that they are not published elsewhere and authors are required totransfer copyright to the publisher of the Journal (YouthLink Scotland and ScottishCentre for Youth Work Studies).

Submission of articles and reviewsManuscripts for publication may be submitted to any member of the EditorialBoard, or directly to the Editors, Annette Coburn or Brian McGinley, Division ofCommunity Education, University of Strathclyde, 76 Southbrae Drive, GlasgowG13 1PP.

All other reviews, articles, policy briefings, think pieces and conversations shouldbe sent to: Annette Coburn or BrianMcGinley, Division of Community Education,University of Strathclyde, 76 Southbrae Drive, Glasgow G13 1P.


101Contributors


102


103

Subscription FormTo subscribe just complete the form below, or a photocopy of it, and return by postand we will send out the latest issue of the Scottish Youth Issues Journal which ispublished twice a year.

Costs of subscriptions for two issues per year:One year (one copy per issue) £30.00One year (two copies per issue) £40.00Three years (one copy per issue) £55.00Bulk purchase (10 or more copies) 10% discount

Back issues are available. Further information on request.

Name

Organisation

Address

Postcode

Tel Fax

Email

I/we would like to subscribe to the Scottish Youth Issues Journal:

One year (one copies per issue) One Year (two copies per issue)Three years (one copy per issue) Bulk purchase (10 or more copies)

I enclose a cheque for ___________________ made payable to YouthLink ScotlandPlease invoice me

Please return completed applications forms to: YouthLink Scotland, Rosebery House,9 Haymarket Terrace, Edinburgh EH12 5EZ. Tel: 0131 313 2488.Fax: 0131 313 6800. Email: [email protected] Web: www.youthlink.co.uk

Scottish Youth Issues Journal

ADVERTISING RATES AND DATAThe Scottish Youth Issues Journal provides a forum for reflection on policyand practice and for the dissemination of research on issues affecting youngpeople – from education, health, housing and culture to employment,criminal justice and politics. Drawing mainly, but not exclusively fromScottish experience, the Journal is published twice a year and containsrefereed articles, research papers, policy analysis and book reviews. It isaddressed to academic specialists, researchers, practitioners in a range ofdisciplines and to those involved in making policies affecting young people.

RATESAdvertisements

Full Page £225 +VAT

Half page (landscape only) £125 +VAT

Insert £150 +VAT for single sheet A5 or A4 (folded)

Delivery to YouthLink Scotland, Rosebery House, 9 Haymarket Terrace,Edinburgh EH12 5EZ and mark for the attention of Julie Wilson.

YouthLink Scotland will typeset and layout your advertisement fromcopy/illustrations supplied. All advertisements will print mono.

DEADLINESProspective advertisers should contact [email protected] fornotification of deadline dates.

FURTHER DETAILSPlease contact: The Scottish Youth Issues Journal, YouthLink Scotland,Rosebery House, 9 Haymarket Terrace, Edinburgh EH12 5EZ. Tel: 0131 3132488. Fax: 0131 313 6800. Email: [email protected]


106



105


EditorialAnnette Coburn and Brian McGinley

Democratic Participation or Surveillance?Structures and Practices for Young People’s Decision-MakingKen McCulloch

Finding Touch: Young Males, Sport and Civic Engagement in AustraliaNeil Hall

Not Such a Fair Go: An Audit of Chilldren’s and Young People’s Rights in AustraliaJudith Bessant

Towards A Person-Centred ‘Culture’: The Use of Community DevelopmentApproaches in the Independent Youth Counselling Service in West BelfastPat Henry, Liz McArdle, Dr. Caryl Sibbett

Who is Youth Work For? Distortions and PossibilitiesTerry Barber

Think PieceStuart Waiton and Simon Knight

Book Reviews

Notes on Contributors

Notes for Contributors

The Scottish Youth Issues Journal is co-published by theDivision of Community Education, University of Strathclydeand YouthLink Scotland, the national youth work agency forScotland. The views expressed in the Scottish Youth IssuesJournal are not necessarily shared by either agency.S c o t l a n d

DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION OR SURVEILLANCE? STRUCTURES AND PRACTICES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE'S...

Documents

Transcript of DEMOCRATIC PARTICIPATION OR SURVEILLANCE? STRUCTURES AND PRACTICES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE'S...