Page 3030 - Week 09 - Thursday, 21 September 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
five children and, as a result, the study itself cannot be released to the public. However, I would like to be able to address some of the community concern that has arisen with the public knowledge of the tragic deaths of these babies, and it is in this context that I comment on the tragic death of Trinaty Howarth in 2005 that has recently been reported.
Trinaty Howarth was not one of the five children examined in the Murray-Mackie study. Trinaty and her family had not been reported to the department prior to the event leading to her tragic death. Trinaty, in fact, only came to the attention of Care and Protection when she had been admitted to the Canberra Hospital in a critical condition. Prior to this report, ACT Care and Protection services, in the Office for Children, Youth and Family Support, had not known Trinaty or her family. An article in the Canberra Times on 25 August headed “A cruel, pointless end to a young life” wrongly made a connection between Trinaty’s death and the death of the other children who died in the past two years and who were known to Care and Protection.
The circumstances regarding the death of Trinaty were very different to the deaths examined in the Murray-Mackie study. It is alleged that Trinaty died as a result of an assault—a matter that is currently before the criminal courts. On initial advice, the young children subject to the Murray-Mackie study are believed to have died as a result of their sleep environment—although these matters may be subject to coronial inquiry. Police have laid no charges in relation to these deaths.
This point of distinction between the circumstances of Trinaty’s death and that of the infants subject to the study was reinforced by Dr Sue Packer, a Canberra paediatrician and the ACT president of the National Association for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, during this year’s recent National Child Protection Week. Dr Packer said that many incidents of child neglect were due to ignorance rather than malice and that there is a lot more that is sad than bad in many cases. Dr Packer went on to state that while the deaths considered by the study were sudden and unexplained—until the coroner reports—they highlight a concern that these babies may not have been in a safe sleeping environment.
During Child Protection Week, the National Association for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, also known as NAPCAN, launched a chart for parents, including a thermometer, to explain safe sleeping. The association is keen to make this chart available to all parents of infants in the ACT. To this end, the government has undertaken to sponsor this initiative through the departments of health and disability, housing and community services.
Mr Speaker, on 24 August I advised the Assembly that five children known to Care and Protection in the ACT had died in the last two years in tragic circumstances. Subsequently, I have been advised that they have since been notified of a premature baby at the Canberra hospital who died before it was able to be discharged. As is the current practice, this latest reported death has been referred to Gwenn Murray and Craig Mackie for examination. I will continue to request such analysis to ensure that we continue to improve our responses to children at risk in our community.
The recommendations that I table today will, as I have outlined, significantly assist our collective efforts to deliver better quality services for children at risk. Substantial elements of the continuing reform program were already in progress prior to the study
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .