The hospital burden of intergenerational contact with the welfare system: A whole-of-population liked data study

Background: Intergenerational welfare contact (IWC) is a policy issue because of the personal and social costs of intergenerational disadvantage. We estimated the hospital burden of IWC for children aged 11-20 years. Methods: This linked data study of children born in South Australia, 1991-1995 (n=94,358), and their parent/s (n=143,814) used de-identified data from the Better Evidence Better Outcomes Linked Data platform. Using Australian Government Centrelink data, welfare contact (WC) was defined as parent/s receiving a means-tested welfare payment (low-income, unemployment, disability or caring) when children were aged 11-15, or children receiving payment at ages 16-20. IWC was WC occurring in both parent and child generations. Children were classified as: No WC, parent only WC, child only WC, or IWC. Hospitalisation rates and cumulative incidence were estimated by age and WC group. Findings: IWC affected 34.9% of children, who had the highest hospitalisation rate (133.5 per 1,000 person-years) compared to no WC (46.1 per 1,000 person-years), parent only WC (75.0 per 1,000 person-years), and child only WC (87.6 per 1,000 person-years). Of all IWC children, 43.0% experienced at least one hospitalisation between 11-20, frequently related to injury, mental health, and pregnancy. Interpretation: Children experiencing IWC represent a third of the population aged 11-20. Compared to children with parent-only WC, IWC children had 78% higher hospitalisation rates from age 11 to 20, accounting for over half of all hospitalisations in this age group. Frequent IWC hospitalisation causes were injuries, mental health, and pregnancy. Funding: Medical Research Future Fund, National Health and Medical Research Council, Westpac Scholars Trust.

Psychiatric Comorbidity and Economic Hardship as Risk Factors for Intentional Self-Harm in Gambling Disorder—A Nationwide Register Study

Background: There is an increased risk of suicidality in gambling disorder (GD) and economic hardship is common in the population. Economic hardship itself is a risk factor for suicidality. This study aims to explore the risk of intentional self-harm in GD utilizing social welfare payment (SWP) as a proxy for economic hardship and exploring how economic hardship, gender, criminality, socioeconomic-, and psychiatric risk factors might contribute to intentional self-harm in GD.Methods: This is a nationwide register-based study of 848 individuals diagnosed with GD in the Swedish healthcare system during the years of 2011–2014 with an average follow up of 4.9 years. Pearson's Chi-square analyses were carried out for comparisons regarding psychiatric comorbidity and intentional self-harm with regards to gender and SWPs. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression were utilized to analyse risk factors for intentional self-harm.Results: A large part of the study population received SWPs (45.5% with an insignificant overrepresentation of women) and psychiatric disorders were more common in these individuals (p < 0.001). Conviction for crime in general (p < 0.001) as well as intentional self-harm (p = 0.025) were also more common amongst recipients of SWPs. Criminal conviction in general was abundant (26.5%). In the stepwise multivariable regression, substance-related diagnoses as well as anxiety, depressive, and personality disorders remained risk factors for intentional self-harm and no significant results were found with regards to gender, criminal history, or SWPs.Conclusions: Social welfare payment was common among GD patients and intentional self-harm was more common amongst recipients than GD patients as a whole. Social welfare payments were however not a significant risk factor for intentional self-harm. However, attention to suicidality and self-injurious behavior should be paid from social services controlling SWPs due to the large prevalence of intentional self-harm in this group. In accordance with previous studies, comorbid psychiatric disorders such as anxiety, depression, substance use, and personality disorders increased the risk of intentional self-harm.

PENGARUH BUDAYA ORGANISASI DAN KOMPENSASI FINANSIAL TIDAK LANGSUNG TERHADAP KINERJA KARYAWAN PADA PT. POS INDONESIA CABANG KUPANG

This research was conducted at PT. Pos Indonesia Kupang Branch. The problem in this research is, "Does the organizational culture affect the performance of employees at PT. Pos Indonesia Kupang Branch "," Does financial compensation indirectly affect the performance of employees at PT. Pos Indonesia Branch Kupang ", and" Does the organizational culture and financial compensation indirectly simultaneously affect the performance of employees at PT. Pos Indonesia Kupang Branch? ". The results of the research show that the Organizational Culture owned by employees of PT. Pos Indonesia Kupang Branch, which consists of 7 (seven) indicators, namely adaptability, autonomy, cooperation, creativity, equality, honesty, rationality has a positive influence on the performance of employees at PT. Pos Indonesia Kupang Branch. Indirect financial compensation owned by employees of PT. Pos Indoensia Kupang Branch, which consists of 3 (three) indicators, namely security and welfare, payment of wages for not working, and services for workers have a positive influence on the performance of employees at PT. Pos Indonesia Kupang Branch. Thus, the company needs to maintain and improve the organizational culture and financial compensation is not directly appropriate so that employee performance will increase. When employee performance increases, the organization can achieve its goals and objectives well. Keywords: organizational culture, indirect financial compensation, and employee performance

Welfare meeting financial services: The Cashless Debit Card dichotomy

Australia has been developing and expanding its policies on compulsory income management. This has culminated in the introduction of the Cashless Debit Card. This card is intended to reduce access to discretionary cash that people may receive as part of their welfare payment. The limitation is designed to block people from accessing any services linked to alcohol and gambling. However, the introduction of this card means that welfare now falls under the Australian financial services arena. This article analyses the dichotomy that exists as a result of this intersection and focuses on highlighting inconsistencies between the two regimes.

Missing out: The intergenerational ramifications of current social security arrangements

Neoliberal reforms and ring-wing ideologies have seen the ideal of the social security ‘safety net’ take a hammering in the UK, USA and Australia. While the gap between rich and poor has widened, and demand for welfare payments increased, politicians, certainly in Australia, have generally neglected low income families, preferring to twiddle the economic dials affecting middle and upper income earners instead. Of course, tussling over who pays tax, how much, what constitutes useful expenditure, and who receives welfare services and benefits is not new – these questions have attended the modern welfare state from its inception. But the welfare safety net that most of us, grudgingly or otherwise, concede to be necessary for collective social harmony is no longer proving as effective as we would wish. Even with a battered and frayed, but still ostensibly functional systems of welfare payment and support offered in Australia, the number of people experiencing perpetual disadvantage is rising, with intergenerational poverty – its increase and impacts on children – of particular concern.

What do New Zealanders think about welfare?

‘Welfare’ is always a controversial topic, with considerable debate about the causes of need and thus who is responsible for ensuring well-being. In its final report the Welfare Working Group (WWG) (2011) acknowledges this, noting that structural factors, such as the recent recession, shape welfare outcomes alongside individual behaviours and problems within welfare institutions. However, the WWG was established specifically to examine ways to reduce longterm benefit dependency in New Zealand amongst people of working age. Its recommendations thus place a particular focus on the individual behaviours of the unemployed. The proposed introduction of Jobseeker Support, a new single work-focused welfare payment to replace all existing categories of benefit, suggests that the circumstances behind working-age benefit receipt are similar and that it is therefore appropriate to extend new reciprocal obligations to a wider range of benefit recipients.