Nothing beats a child's smile when it comes to true happiness: Telegraph reports
Spending on child protection has almost doubled in a decade, so why isn’t it improving?
The central aim of any child protection system is in the name: protect children. But over the years, inquiries and media reports have shown fulfilling this goal has too often proved tragically elusive.
In response, governments across the country have poured more and more money into their child protection systems in the hope of getting better outcomes.
Our newly-published research shows total national spending has almost doubled over the decade, climbing from $5.4 billion in 2014–15 to $10.2 billion in 2023–24 (adjusted for inflation).
But we found this hasn’t been matched by changes in activity across systems, like increases in the rate of investigations for alleged maltreatment, or the number of children entering out-of-home care. Nor has it improved outcomes for children.
So if money alone isn’t the answer, what is? Here’s what the evidence shows would help.
A maze of moving parts
Protecting Australia’s children is not the job of a single system. It involves many overlapping systems – health, childcare, education, justice and policing, disability services, and other parts of the social welfare system – working together to prevent and respond to child abuse, neglect and exploitation.
In Australia, there is no national child protection system to bring these parts together. Each state and territory runs its own. They share the same guiding principles, such as acting in the best interests of the child. But how they operate in practice differs across the country.
The result is several systems made up of many moving parts that do not always work as a coordinated whole. And too often, prevention is left to the side, in favour of reacting to harm once it has already happened.
Recent inquiries in Queensland and Victoria show this fragmentation is not just inefficient, but may be causing more harm than good.
The concerns raised in the recent Queensland and Victorian inquiries about how we protect children are not new. They have been raised many times in recent history.
Queensland alone has had four inquiries in the past 30 years (1999, 2004, 2012–13 and 2025–26), while Victoria has had three (2012, 2024, and 2026).
But as the presiding commissioner for the 2025–26 Queensland inquiry, Paul Anastassiou put it:
[…] the child protection system continues to fail children and the community in serious respects.
So, what are the problems?
1. Child protection systems don’t work as a whole
Statutory child protection services hold decision-making authority over when and how to intervene in a child’s life, and ultimately, whether a child needs to be removed from their parent(s) to keep them safe.
But it doesn’t control the conditions that create harm in the first place. Those sit across other systems.
For example, poverty and housing instability are linked to harm, yet responsibility for addressing these conditions lies within housing and income support systems, not child protection.
Similarly, other causes of harm such as family violence, mental illness, and substance use are addressed through justice, health, and alcohol and other drug systems.
This means responsibility for child safety is distributed across many systems. Accountability, however, is not.
Each system remains accountable for its own functions, rather than for whether children are kept safe, stable and supported. No single system is accountable for whether the child’s best interests are upheld across their life course.
This has real consequences for statutory child protection decision-making. Information about children and families sits across multiple systems, and those systems do not always communicate. So, child safety decisions are often made with incomplete, fragmented or selectively available information.
At the same time, decisions are made under pressure and often rely on adult’s views without meaningful consultation of children and young people about their own safety, or what would help.
Together, this creates child protection systems where high-stakes decisions are made on shaky foundations.
2. Child protection systems act too late and can cause harm
Systems remain overwhelmingly reactive, responding only after harm has happened, rather than preventing it in the first place.
In more than 50% of cases, children and families in contact with systems have already been subject to a child protection investigation.
The Victorian inquiry revealed that once in contact with statutory child protection, children aged 15–17 years old can expect to be re-reported almost seven times.
While this is not a new problem, it is one that must be solved.
Worse still, child protection systems themselves can cause harm. Children might experience multiple placements, uprooting relational and environmental stability, as well as significant delays in receiving health and medical care.
The most recent Queensland inquiry also highlighted children placed in residential care in particular experience higher rates of trauma, unmet mental health needs, self-harm and suicide attempts.
The commission rightly recognised the state’s heavy reliance on residential care as one of its biggest failures.
3. Over-prioritising crisis responses
Both the Queensland and Victorian inquiries found most resources are spent on responding to crises rather than on early intervention.
Our research found while overall spending was increasing, out-of-home care saw most of the funding boost. Between 2014–15 and 2023–24, the proportion of all spending that was on activities associated with out-of-home care increased from 58.4% to 63.6%.
Meanwhile, investment in intensive family support reduced from 8.2% to 6.2% of the overall spend.
What needs to be done?
Together, findings from recent inquiries and our own research show child protection systems across Australia are not consistently delivering on their core aim: acting in the best interests of the child.
While state-level statutory child protection reform is welcome, addressing this will require federal leadership.
Australia needs a national child maltreatment prevention agenda with sustained investment in prevention and early support. It could be overseen by the Department of Social Services, whose role is to improve the economic and social wellbeing of individuals, families and vulnerable members of Australian communities.
Alternatively, because child maltreatment is a significant public health issue, it could also be assigned to the Australian Centre for Disease Control: a national agency established to strengthen Australia’s prevention, preparedness and response to public health threats.
There also needs to be shared accountability across all systems that should be involved in supporting children’s safety.
Finally, genuine partnership with First Nations organisations is needed to help Indigenous children, who are over-represented in child protection systems.
Until these systems are designed to work together, they will continue to fail to deliver what children need most: safety, stability and support.![]()
Claudia Bull, Postdoctoral research fellow, Deakin University and Daryl Higgins, Professor & Director, Institute of Child Protection Studies, Australian Catholic University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
How much clothing is too much? The maths behind having a sustainable wardrobe
Most people suspect they own too many clothes, but they aren’t sure exactly what the “right amount” is. Recent wardrobe studies, in which researchers literally peek inside peoples’ closets, show the scale of the problem is far greater than most of us imagine.
Sixty years ago, the average person owned about 40 garments.
Today, that number has more than quadrupled, with a recent study revealing these numbers continue to trend upwards. The typical wardrobe now contains an average of 199 major pieces. Even more striking: 25%–50% of these items are languishing in the back of drawers and rails.
Our hidden clothing footprint
Research tells us this is not just a clutter issue — it’s a carbon one. Every garment carries a sizeable environmental footprint long before it reaches a hanger, including from fibre production, spinning, weaving, dyeing, cutting, sewing, packaging and global transport.
A jacket that ends up as fashion waste is more than a label and price tag. It’s the sum of all the resources and emissions that brought it into being.
At the same time, donating excess garments to charities is rarely a solution.
Before you channel your inner Marie Kondo and bag up half your wardrobe, it’s worth knowing that most charities are overwhelmed, and only a small fraction of donated clothing is resold. The rest often ends up in landfill or exported overseas, shifting the problem, rather than solving it.
The real issue isn’t simply how much we buy, but how little we wear what we already own.
Wear counts change everything
One of the clearest findings emerging from sustainability research is that the environmental impact of a garment often depends on how many times it’s worn. In a sense, every additional wear helps “offset” the garment’s carbon footprint.
The European Union has calculated the minimum number of wears needed for different clothing types:
• shirts and blouses: 40 wears
• T shirts: 45 wears
• pants, shorts, dresses, skirts, jumpsuits, leggings: 70 wears
• jumpers, cardigans, hoodies: 85 wears
• jackets and coats: 100 wears.
For many people, these numbers may be far higher than expected – and they shift the sustainability conversation from “buying better” to “wearing more”.
The wardrobe equation
My own recent research has gone further by offering a simple mathematical model to calculate how long it takes to reach these minimum wear counts. The formula is straightforward: wearing frequency × wardrobe volume. The results are eye opening.
Take dresses. The average participant in the study owned 23. So if they wore a dress once a week, it would take nearly 31 years to wear each one 70 times. If they wear dresses five times a week, the timeline drops to six and a half years.
The maths makes the issue clear: there is no universal “right” number of clothes. A sustainable wardrobe depends entirely on how often a person wears what they own, which is influenced by factors such as seasonality, climate, lifestyle, laundry habits and personal style.
The maths also becomes more complicated when you look at the entire wardrobe, rather than a single garment type.
Why a tailored approach is needed
Because of this complexity, it’s difficult to declare a fixed number of garments that constitutes a sustainable wardrobe.
As such, the next phase of my project is the development of an interactive wardrobe calculator – a tool designed to help individuals understand their own clothing use patterns and calculate a personalised sustainable wardrobe size.
The Paris 2030 Agreement to stay below 1.5°C of global warming recommends 85 garments or less would be a responsible target – although imposing strict limits does not take individual wearing patterns into account. People need a practical, tailored approach that reflects their real lives.
What the research makes clear is that sustainability isn’t about owning the perfect number of clothes, or purging half your wardrobe. It’s about understanding the maths behind what you own, how often you wear it, and how those choices shape your environmental impact.![]()
Alicja Kuźmycz, Lecturer, Torrens University Australia
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Personal transformation in 6 simple steps
Western Tatami Mat Mania Keeping Alive Japan’s Traditional Woven Grass Flooring Industry

It’s a pool party! How to stay safe around the pool with friends this summer
Amy Peden, UNSW Sydney
It’s summer so kids’ playdates and birthday parties might start moving from the playground to the pool.
I research how to prevent drowning. I’m also a mum of two kids living in a house with a pool. So water safety is always front of mind.
Drowning deaths are at a record high in Australia. For pre-schoolers, this often happens in backyard pools. Although school-aged children have a much lower risk it’s still important to be vigilant.
Here are some key questions to ask and things to consider before you accept an invitation to a pool party or host your own.
With these tips, you’ll be able to navigate pool safety while ensuring the kids have heaps of fun.
Not everyone knows how to swim
First, think about your child’s swimming ability. Have they learned to swim? Do you know how their ability stacks up against their peers? Check their skills against the recommended minimum national swimming and water safety benchmarks for their age.
Perhaps some top-up lessons or some intensive lessons over summer might give their skills a boost ahead of a busy swim season.
As important as swimming skills are, so too is knowing how to be safe around the water. Have you talked to your kids about water safety? Are they mindful that others may not be able to swim as well as they can and may not be comfortable disclosing this to their friends?
Have you discussed how dangerous it can be to hold each other down under the water or hold their breath to swim to the end of the pool repeatedly? It can lead to someone blacking out.
It’s also not just about drowning. Knowing about water depth, the dangers of diving into shallow water, and not running around a wet and slippery pool can help avoid injury.
It’s not just about the kids
You also have a more direct role in keeping everyone safe. If you’re hosting a playdate and planning to include a swim, have you checked with the child’s parents? Ask about children’s swimming abilities or fears.
Before everyone hits the water, discuss your pool safety rules and expectations with the kids, including your own. My kids, and their friends, are very used to my “lifeguard lectures” by now.
An important part of playing lifeguard is supervision. If your kids’ friends are weak or poor swimmers, regardless of their age, you should be in the water with them. This is usually more fun anyway.
For older kids and more confident swimmers it’s still best to supervise from a distance (maybe poolside) and be dressed ready to get into the water in an emergency.
If you’re expecting more than a couple of kids, you might need more than one adult to ensure adequate supervision (and keep your stress levels down). Ensure each person’s supervision responsibilities are clear to avoid tragic miscommunications, such as: “I thought you were looking after them.”
Have you refreshed your CPR skills lately? Does your pool have a CPR sign you can refer to? Is your pool fenced and compliant? Does the gate close and lock on its own?
What about at someone else’s house?
Are you confident in your child’s ability to swim and be safe around the pool, if you’re not there? Have the hosts asked about your child’s swimming ability and any concerns? If not, you should be proactive and flag them.
Remember that eveyone’s definition of “can swim” is different. Would the hosts mind if you stayed to help supervise?
If you’re going to do the “drop and run”, will the adults hosting be supervising? How vigilant will they be? Will the adults be drinking alcohol?
Having the conversation early can ensure all parents involved are aligned on matters of water safety.
We’re heading to the local pool instead
Many of the same rules apply if you’re meeting up with friends for a swim at your local pool.
Conditions here are more controlled with depth markers and safety equipment. But none of this replaces good swimming skills and safe behaviours.
Although lifeguards are on hand to help should anything go wrong, they are not a substitute for active parental supervision and shouldn’t be treated as babysitters.
In fact, reports of aggression and verbal and physical abuse of lifeguards are increasing, so please be respectful and keep your cool.
Keep yourself safe too
Kids aren’t the only ones who can get into trouble in the water. Adult drownings in a variety of different waterways are also on the rise.
So if you’re hitting the pool this summer, avoid alcohol around the water. You can even be impaired the day after heavy drinking.
Older adults can also be at risk of drowning in backyard pools due to medical incidents, such as a heart attack, or accidentally falling into the water.
If you keep all these issues in mind, we can all have a safe and enjoyable summer by the pool.![]()
Amy Peden, NHMRC Research Fellow, School of Population Health and Co-founder UNSW Beach Safety Research Group, UNSW Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
How to handle teen ‘big feelings’ as the social media ban kicks in
Christiane Kehoe, The University of Melbourne and Elizabeth Westrupp, Deakin University
Watching your teenager grieve the loss of their social media account can be confronting. Many are genuinely distressed or struggling with the change, and many parents are unsure how to respond.
Australia’s social media ban, which started this week, means teens under the age of 16, have lost accounts to platforms such as TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram.
These are the platforms they relied on to talk to friends, find support, follow interests, or decompress after school.
While some teens feel relieved or not fussed, many are feeling sad, worried, powerless, helpless, disappointed or angry.
These aren’t signs of entitlement. They’re signs your teen may need support.
Why losing social media hits some teens hard
There’s a neurological reason why the loss of social media can hit teens so hard.
Adolescence is a period of enormous social, neurological and emotional change. Teen brains are wired for peer connection, and their brains become more sensitive to feedback from their peers. Meanwhile the brain regions responsible for impulse control, managing strong emotions and long-term planning are still developing.
When teens say losing social media feels like being “cut off”, they aren’t being dramatic. Their neurological systems are reacting to a loss of social reinforcement.
Connect and validate their feelings
If your teen is upset, the instinct might be to justify the government’s decision or to explain why life offline is healthier. However, advice lands badly when a young person feels unheard. Teens often perceive even well-meaning advice as criticism.
Accepting their feelings about the changes helps validate their experience. You can say:
Feeling angry or sad makes total sense. I know you used those sites to stay connected with your friends.
Losing your account feels huge. It’s a big change to deal with.
Then pause and listen.
Or you can sit with them without saying much. Some teens prefer parents to just listen sympathetically.
Supporting your teen doesn’t mean you agree with their perspective. It means you’re acknowledging their emotional reality. When teens feel understood, they become more open to talking – and eventually, to problem-solving.
The first two weeks may be the toughest. Some teens may experience grief and withdrawal-like symptoms: boredom, anxiety, irritability, restlessness and a powerful urge to “just check once”.
Help teens understand these reactions are normal. Social media platforms are designed to keep users hooked.
Understand the ‘why’ together
It might help to explore the governement’s concerns about social media with your teen – but not as a lecture. The ban isn’t about social media being inherently bad, but about how platforms are designed.
You can talk about algorithms maximising engagement using the same mechanisms as gambling to encourage dependence and addiction. Or you can talk about how feeds are personalised to keep users scrolling for longer.
Ask your teen what they think about these concerns. This isn’t about convincing them the ban is right, but developing their awareness of how digital platforms work. This prepares them for use when they’re older.
Help teens rebuild what social media gave them
To support your teen, it helps to understand the function social media played in their life. Was it to:
- connect with friends?
- find community around a niche interest or identity?
- share creative work, or find outlets for self-expression?
- de-stress after a busy day?
- know what others are talking about?
Once you understand this, you can help them find alternatives that genuinely meet their needs. They might be able to maintain:
- connection by organising a get-together, make FaceTime calls, join clubs, or have group chats on allowed platforms
- creativity by finding other outlets such as photography, video-making, music, writing, art, or gaming communities with safe age settings
- relaxation by reading, exercise, podcasts, nature time, shows you can watch together.
Many teens won’t immediately know what they want to try. They may need time and space to have their feelings first. Once they are ready, inviting them to brainstorm a few options (without pressuring them) can help.
Problem-solve together, notice efforts
Once emotions settle, gently shift to collaborative problem-solving. You can ask:
What’s been the hardest part this week?
How could we help you stay connected in ways that are allowed?
What would make this change even a tiny bit easier?
Let your teen lead. Young people are much more likely to follow through on strategies they helped design.
Even small signs of coping deserve acknowledgement. You can say:
I can see you’ve been finding other ways to talk to friends. That takes maturity.
I’m proud of how open you’ve been about how you’re feeling.
But if something doesn’t work, treat it like an experiment. You can say:
OK, that didn’t help as much as we hoped. What else could we try?
Check in later
For teens, losing social media isn’t simply losing an app. It can feel like losing a community, a creative outlet, or a place where they felt understood.
Keep an eye out and offer opportunities to check in with how they are going. This ensures teens don’t navigate this transition alone or become secretive – and that your relationship remains a source of support.
The eSafety Commissioner website explains why the rules were brought in and how they will work; youth mental health service headspace has seven tips for navigating the social media ban; the Raising Children’s website explains how teens use technology for entertainment; tips for digital wellness and how to draw up a “contract” for use of a child’s first phone are also available.![]()
Christiane Kehoe, Senior Lecturer in Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne and Elizabeth Westrupp, Associate Professor in Psychology, Deakin University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
5 heartwarming gestures for your best friend
Parents Reveal the Pros (and Cons) of Having Adult Kids Still Living at Home

Man’s Best Friend Recognized as Dog of the Year For Saving Him from a Bear Attack
Craig Campbell and his Doberman named Night – Supplied, Craig CampbellBuilding confidence & transforming people’s lives through Makeup
Beard Styles for men

California Developer Builds First Neighborhood Where All the Homes Are Resistant to Wildfires
Dixon Trail wildfire-resistant neighborhood in CA – KB HomesNo AC Needed in India’s Heat: Inside Gujarat’s Eco-Friendly ‘Cool House’
The Gujarat ‘Cool House’ – credit SRDA
Mirai House of Arches in Bhilwara – credit Sanjay Puri ArchitectsFive Ways to Move Beyond the Monster of Self-Doubt and Pursue Your Passion
Photo by Daniel Martinez For Unsplash+