Policy | Email Your Candidates to End Child Poverty and Review Reform of OPF Payment

With just one week to go until General Election 2016, we urge everyone to email their local candidates to ensure that one-parent families are on their agenda. We are calling for six key commitments which you can read about below.Election Manifesto 2016_1

Election Manifesto 2016_2

It’s easy to email all of your local candidates in just one minute; click here. You can also download two handy documents with questions and take away messages for candidates who call to your door, to help ensure that they know that these issues matter for all families in Ireland.

#GE2016 #EndChildPovery #MyFamilyMatters

Use the social share buttons below to ask your friends and family to support our Election Manifesto for one-parent families.

askonefamily | Child and Family Relationships Act 2015

On Monday the 18th January 2016, some parts of the Child and Family Relationships Act 2015 were commenced. These changes in legislation may have a direct impact on those parenting alone, sharing parenting and parenting after separation so the following information on Guardianship, Custody, Access and Maintenance may be relevant to you:

Guardianship

  • For an unmarried father this means that he may automatically become a guardian of his child if he has lived with the mother on a continuous basis for 12 months and at least 3 of these months must be after the birth of the child.

This 12 month period only takes effect from the date this was enacted, so from the 18th January 2016 and is not retrospective.

  • For other family members, such as grandparents, civil partners, step-parents and others who have acted in “loco parentis” (in the place of the parent) of a child they may apply to court for guardianship. The requirements for this is that a person is in a relationship, either in marriage or civil partnership, or has lived with the parent of a child for over 3 years and has shared the day to day care of the child for at least 2 years.
  • If a person has cared for a child on a day to day to basis, continuously for 12 months and there is no parent or guardian able or willing to exercise the rights and responsibilities for the child then they may apply for guardianship, so for example this may be a grandparent caring for their grandchild or a foster parent caring for a child.

Access

  • For grandparents the Act means that they can now apply directly to the District court for access with their grandchildren, if they do not already have access.

Custody

  • A court may make an order for custody following an application by a person other than the mother or father. This may be a person who is a relative of the child; it may be a person with who the child has resided with, or if the person is married to, in a civil partnership with or who has cohabited with the parent of the child for at least 3 years and has been involved in the day to day care of the child for at least 2 years. A person may also seek custody where the child has resided with this person who has had day to day care of the child and who does not have a parent or guardian who is able or willing to take on the responsibilities of being the guardian.

Maintenance

  • A maintenance order may be sought, requiring the cohabiting partner of a child’s parent to pay maintenance for the child, provided they are a guardian of the child.

Enforcement Orders

  • These relate to access and custody whereby if a court order is made in respect of custody or access and this is unreasonably denied or not taken up then a parent or guardian may apply for an enforcement order. Such an order may require that:

A parent or guardian, or both attend counselling, mediation or a parenting programme

That additional access may be granted

That a parent or guardian be reimbursed for expenses as a result of the denial of access or the refusal to take up access.

Any decision made by the court will be made in the best interests of the child and the court will consider the views of the child where possible given his/her age and understanding.

 

 

Policy | Back to Education Allowance – What does it mean for Education and Employability?

JOB 200x200Stuart Duffin, Director of Policy and Programmes, One Family, responds to the recent findings of the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) that there is ‘no evidence that the Back to Education Allowance employment support programme is effective helping unemployed people to find jobs’.

The relationship between education and the economy is longstanding. Employers generally see achievements related to the subject discipline in education as necessary but not sufficient for people to be employed. In some employment contexts the actual subject discipline may be relatively unimportant.  Achievements outside the boundaries of a discipline (such as the possession of so-called ‘soft skills’) are generally considered to be important for a job. Yet ’employability’ is not a major feature in education programmes in Ireland; or why should it be?

‘Employability’ refers to achievements and potential to obtain a ‘job’, and should not be confused with the actual acquisition of a ‘job’ (which is subject to influences in the environment, a major influence being the state of the economy). Employability derives from complex learning and is a concept of a wider range than those of ‘core’ and ‘key’ skills. The transferability of skills is often too easily assumed. There is some evidence to suggest that references to employability make the implicit assumption that graduates from education are young people. The risk is of not considering employability in respect of older graduates, who have the potential to bring a more extensive life-experience to bear. Employability is not merely an attribute of the new graduate. It needs to be continuously refreshed throughout a person’s working life.

There are many definitions of what it is to be employable and views on the processes that develop this attribute which are based on the premise that, in education, employability is about good learning. One of many definitions of employability is: ‘A set of skills, knowledge and personal attributes that make an individual more likely to secure and be successful in their chosen occupation(s) to the benefit of themselves, the workforce, the community and the economy.’

Therefore, employability goes well beyond the simplistic notion of key skills and is evidenced in the application of a mix of personal qualities and beliefs, understandings, skilful practices and the ability to reflect productively on experience.

Notice that the commonly used terms ‘knowledge’ and ‘skills’ are not used. They have been replaced by ‘understandings’ and ‘skilful practices’ respectively, in order to signal the importance of a rich appreciation of the relevant fields and of the ability to operate in situations of complexity and ambiguity. There is a parallel here with Stephenson’s (1998[1]) suggestion that the capable person can work effectively on unfamiliar problems in unfamiliar contexts as well as on familiar problems in familiar contexts (which is really a matter of routine). Given that this account of employability stresses complexity, it follows that pedagogy for employability (and the associated assessment) (a) needs to take the inherent complexity of the construct into account, and (b) will be promoting similar achievements to those that teachers in education , at all levels, tend to value. Much of the discussion of employability implicitly refers to the full-time student who enters education at around the age of 18 and who graduates at the age of 21 or 22, and deals with matters beyond the boundaries of the subject discipline(s) concerned.

For older students (many of who will opt to study part-time), employability may take on a different route, since they may well have experienced employment and/or voluntary work prior to (or whilst they are) engaging in education. For them, the emphasis that they give to employability may be on the development of subject-specific understanding to complement what they have already learned about employability in general.

There is also a need to acknowledge the employment-relevant learning that ostensibly full-time students derive from part-time employment as they seek to fund their passage through education. Students, therefore, will develop their employability in ways that reflect their particular circumstances. It might be hoped that they would become capable in the sense outlined by Stephenson (1998).

Capable people have confidence in their ability to:

  1. Take effective and appropriate action.
  2. Explain what they are seeking to achieve.
  3. Live and work effectively with others.
  4. Continue to learn from their experiences, both as individuals and in association with others, in a diverse and changing society.

Capability is a necessary part of specialist expertise, not separate from it. Capable people not only know about their specialism but they also have the confidence to apply their knowledge and skills within varied and changing situations and to continue to develop their specialist knowledge and skills. Stephenson’s words point beyond employability at the moment of graduation towards employability in the context of lifelong learning (a point that is implicit in all the definitions of employability).

We have a system in Ireland whereby:

  1. We see education as solely not about investing in human capital and enabling people into a better place.
  2. We lack a coherent and integrated set of supports and aftercare while in education to enable sustainable employment options in the future.
  3. We lack, with the Department of Social Protection understanding of human capital investment and employability skills.
  4. Lack of skills of DSP staff to support and guide people.

Going forward, the Back to Education Allowance should be an education support not an employability support; and therefore taken out the auspices of Social Protection and given to Education and Skills. After all, they are the experts. Though attention is focused on the transition between education and employment, it is important to remember that – as stickers in the rear windows of cars provide reminders in respect of pets – employability, for most people, is for life.

 

 

Policy | At the Centre of Social Welfare Change

One Family Director of Policy & Programmes, Stuart Duffin, writes about what should be at the centre of social welfare change.

As an election looms for Spring 2016 we need to begin to raising public awareness on the issue of poverty and its effects on health. Our social welfare system is undergoing fundamental change. Reforms affecting many working lone parents are plunging many into even deeper poverty and reinforcing inequality. Restructuring is creating a system which is leaving more parents without constructive supports, whilst those who may qualify must engage with a system which lacks compassion and fails to treat them with dignity and respect.

The Government’s approach to simplifying welfare is undermined by increasing conditionality, and the erosion of a rights based approach to entitlement. The characterisation of one-parent families as undeserving – ‘skivers’ enjoying an overly generous system or worse, actively defrauding the system at the expense of hard working taxpayers – ignores the evidence about the reality of parents’ lives. This rhetoric is used to justify the approach. Many one-parent families who are on the JobSeekers Allowance for example, are required to engage in stressful work seeking activities despite inadequate childcare provision. Parents are blamed for not being in paid work while the real barriers to employment such as the lack of jobs, lack of affordable and suitable childcare, non-family friendly practices and employer discrimination, and our low wage economy are not tackled effectively. At the same time, an immense amount of unpaid work in caring for children (most often done by women) or socially worthwhile volunteering goes unrecognised and unrewarded.

The need for a new architecture for social welfare and protection has never been more pressing.

Therefore, One Family is developing and promoting a Manifesto for Change, which includes:

  1. Parents need income security at a level where no one is left in poverty and all have sufficient income to lead a dignified life.
  2. Make respect for human rights and dignity the cornerstone of a new approach to welfare.
  3. Radically simplify the social protection system.
  4. Invest in the support needed to enable families to participate fully in society.

Our future is better when we feel secure and supported; not when we are vilified and our needs are ignored.

One Family’s Manifesto for Change will be available on this site prior to General Election 2016.

Policy | OFP Reform – The Real Life Impacts

Dad and child's handsIn recent months, much has been written and said about both the problems and benefits for one-parent families on social welfare that have been put through the One-Parent Family Payment (OFP) reform process. At the heart of this are the cuts in income faced by many parents who are working part-time and in receipt of social welfare.

We asked Theresa, Emer and Sharon, each of whom is parenting alone, working part-time and has been recently transitioned from the OFP, to share the reality of their experiences of this reform process. Despite the fact that Theresa, Emer and Sharon is each doing what Government said this reform is supposed to enable – activation – all of their families have suffered a substantial financial loss. You can read what they told us below.

One Family believes that it is counter-productive to Government policy to enforce income losses on poor families when the objective of the reforms is to support people off welfare and out of poverty into sustainable employment. It is also counter-productive to imply that people parenting alone and in receipt of the OFP do not want to work. They do, and many are also in education.

These debates have not been helped by  misinformation about how comparatively ‘well-off’ some families are on social welfare, or how much better off they could be in different circumstances; for example, if they were to increase their hours of part-time employment to become eligible for Family Income Supplement (FIS). One Family is responding clearly with some facts and the real-life case-studies of Theresa, Emer and Sharon in order to demonstrate the reality for the families we work with and represent.

Some facts in response to Government briefings:

  • Atypical examples | It is unhelpful that atypical examples are being consistently put into the public domain, such as the example indicating that a lone parent with three children who works over 19 hours per week and qualifies for BTWFD will earn the same as a teacher. There are very few lone parents with three children (Census 2011 indicates 15.7% on all one-parent families, but this could be as low as 11% for those actually in receipt of a social welfare payment); the childcare costs associated with this atypical example are not factored in; and neither is the fact that BTWFD is only available at full rate for one year, is reduced completely after two, and is not available to those transitioned before 1 January this year. The ‘typical’ one-parent family includes one child (56.11%) or two children (28.17%).
  • Other countries | Comparisons to other countries that require lone parents to be available for work when their children are younger than 7 are unhelpful and unrealistic as the structures in place in countries referenced such as New Zealand, the UK and the Netherlands are not comparable to Ireland due to the lack of available childcare here and other structural barriers. Also, there are far higher rates of investment in social services in these countries that practically enable parents to return to the work force.
  • FIS | It is unhelpful to posit the gain that parents might get if they are able to increase their hours of work to over 19 whilst on the JSTA so that they become eligible for FIS, as this is extremely difficult for many to achieve. We are aware of many sectors, including government funded services, where people are unable to increase their hours. These commonly include childcare staff (particularly those providing ECCE hours); SNAs and other school staff who are frequently let go every summer; and retail staff who are subjected to zero hour contracts etc. It seems unrealistic that Government will be able to work with employers on this or that employers can be expected to always be in a position to create more hours, and it is unrealistic to expect employees to be able to demand more hours if those hours are not available.
  • BTWFD | Since the reform introduction, some 17,000 lone parents have already transitioned from the OFP scheme to other income support payments in 2013 and 2014. This means that none of these parents were entitled to the Back To Work Family Dividend (BTWFD) which is supposed to support families to move from social welfare into employment.
  • Childcare | The severe lack of affordable, accessible high quality childcare being uniformly available throughout Ireland remains a massive barrier. This problem for all families with children is far from being resolved; or any workable, time-lined potential solution been put forward by Government. Ireland’s childcare costs remain amongst the most expensive in the world, second only to the US. These reforms aimed to move more lone parents into the workplace are being implemented at a time when even many parents in working two-parent families feel they have no choice but for one partner to leave work owing to childcare costs being unaffordable. People parenting alone do not have a parenting partner to assist with childcare, school runs, school holidays etc. while at work and often do not have family support available.
  • Income loss totals | Approximately 11,000 parents and families have lost income as a result of being transitioned to Jobseeker’s Transitional Allowance (JSTA) or Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) from the OFP. We do not yet know how many have or will gain financially, but we hope that this figure is high.
  • Income loss amounts | The figures proposed by DSP of the losses that parents will face have been consistently under-estimated, based on testimony to One Family from many parents. We have heard of losses ranging from €30 to €140 per week. In the real-life case studies below, three parents clearly outline how they have lost from €45.20 to €115 per week.

Theresa, Emer and Sharon are all doing what Government says this reform process was implemented to support, and which should result in an increase in income: they are all working part-time over 19 hours per week and in receipt of FIS.

OFP Reform_Theresa

OFP Reform_Emer

OFP Reform_Sharon