INDIGENOUS FEMALE SOLE PARENTS, A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF 1996 CENSUS DATA ¹

Anne Daly

This paper presents a preliminary analysis of 1996 Census data relating to female indigenous sole parents. It confirms results from the 1991 Census which show that sole-parent families account for a larger share of indigenous families than is the case among other Australian families. Indigenous female sole parents tend to be younger and to have larger numbers of children and less education. They are also less likely to be in employment than other Australian sole parents.

INDIGENOUS SOLE-PARENT FAMILIES: AGE STRUCTURE AND FORMATION

Analysis of the 1991 census data enabled us to quantify for the first time at an aggregate level, some important characteristics of indigenous sole parents.² This article brings the earlier work up-to-date with a preliminary analysis of 1996 census data. It confirms the earlier results. Indigenous female sole parents are younger, less likely to ever have been married and more likely to have had more children than other Australian female sole parents. They have lower levels of education and are less likely to be in employment than other Australian sole parents. These characteristics were associated with low family incomes.
According to the 1996 census, about 40 per cent of indigenous families with children under 15 years of age were sole-parent families. The following discussion will focus on female-headed sole-parent families, which accounted for the overwhelming majority of these sole parent families. Figure 1 compares the age distribution of indigenous female sole parents with two other groups: indigenous females who were partnered, either in a married or de facto relationship, and non-indigenous female sole parents. Indigenous female sole parents were younger than the other two groups. Twenty-four per cent of them were under 25 years of age compared with 15 per cent of partnered indigenous female parents and 12 per cent of non-indigenous female sole parents. The latter group was concentrated in the age groups between 35 and 44.

Figure 1: The age distribution of indigenous and non-indigenous females with children under 15 years of age, 1996

Indigenous female sole parents were much less likely to have been married than other Australian female sole parents (see Table 1). Nearly two-thirds of them had never been married compared with a third of other Australian female sole parents. While 60 per cent of non-indigenous female sole parents were either divorced or separated only a quarter of indigenous female sole parents fell into these categories. These differences raise the question as to whether indigenous sole parent families tend to formed in a different way from other Australian sole-parent families. It is more common in the wider Australian community for sole- parent families to be formed after the breakdown of a partnered relationship. These results suggest the possibility that a substantial proportion of indigenous female sole parents may never have been part of a long-term relationship. But, as Table 1 shows, there was a high incidence of indigenous female members in a partnered relationship reporting that they had never been married. In these circumstances, if the partnership ceased, members may well report that they had never been married. Therefore, an improved understanding of the typical history of indigenous sole-parent families is an important issue for policy in this area. It is interesting to note, in the light of the lower life expectancy of indigenous males, that a larger proportion of indigenous female sole parents described themselves as widowed than amongst other Australian female sole parents.

LEVELS OF CHILD DEPENDENCY

The average indigenous female sole parent had given birth to a larger number of children than other female sole parents (see Table 1). They also tend to be younger. This suggests that their completed family size may turn out to be even larger. Earlier research by Daly and Smith shows that children acquired by birth are only part of the story concerning the child-dependency ratios faced by this group. According to 1991 Census data, about a quarter of indigenous sole-parent families included foster children, either legally fostered or by customary arrangements. This compared with nine per cent of other Australian sole-parent families and 14 per cent of indigenous two-parent families. These differences probably reflect the greater importance of extended family care for children among indigenous people than among other Australian families. The average number of children in the care of indigenous female sole parents therefore exceeded the average number cared for by other female sole parents in 1991.

THE EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF INDIGENOUS FEMALE SOLE PARENTS

Table 2 compares the educational qualifications of indigenous female sole parents with the two comparison groups. There was little difference between the qualification levels of the two groups of indigenous females, but they were less likely to hold a post-secondary qualification than non-indigenous sole parents.

Earlier studies show that indigenous people with post-secondary qualifications were more likely to be in employment than other indigenous Australians.³ The low educational levels of indigenous female sole parents are probably one of the factors contributing to the low levels of employment. Only a quarter of indigenous female sole parents were employed compared with 43 per cent of other Australian female sole parents. There are common factors which influence the employment status of all indigenous females. These are evident in the fact that the proportion of partnered indigenous females who were employed was below that of non-indigenous sole parents, a group with low levels of employment compared with other Australian females.⁴ Among the indigenous women who were employed, female sole parents tended to be concentrated in the less-skilled occupations, and to be under-represented in the professional occupations compared with other Australian female sole parents. This was also true for indigenous females with partners and reflects such factors as the lower educational status of the indigenous population.⁵

INDIGENOUS SOLE-PARENT FAMILY INCOME LEVELS

The implications for family income of low levels of employment are apparent in Table 3. The estimated median weekly family income of indigenous female-headed sole-parent families was 91 per cent of that of other Australian female-headed sole parent families. Given that they were less likely to be receiving child support from the non-custodial parent than were other Australian sole-parent families and were less likely to be in employment, it is perhaps surprising that the estimate is not smaller. However, if the family income were corrected for the number of people it supported, the difference between indigenous and non-indigenous sole-parent families would increase.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

This preliminary update of previous research on indigenous sole-parent families confirms the earlier results which show that this is a particularly vulnerable group with different characteristics from other Australian sole parents. Some of the disadvantages they face, for example low levels of education, are common to both the indigenous groups identified here: female sole parents and those with partners. The issue of access to education and employment opportunities for indigenous Australians needs to be addressed more widely than just to focus on sole parents.

However, indigenous female sole parents face particular problems, the most obvious being the need to provide for their children. While case-study evidence highlights the importance of extended family in caring for indigenous children, there is also evidence that access to a reliable income from the sole-parent pension (SPP) may act as a magnet for members of the extended family.⁶ As the high incidence of foster care amongst indigenous sole-parent families indicates, the sole-parent pension may in fact support more people than it is intended to do.

Department of Social Security (DSS) data show that indigenous female sole parents are more likely to be wholly reliant on the SPP than other Australian female sole parents. They are also far less likely to receive child support from the non-custodial parent. This raises the issue of the problems associated with welfare dependence. An international trend has been toward the tightening of conditions attached to the receipt of welfare payments. While there may be long-term benefits for the individuals concerned in encouraging self-sufficiency, these changes may create considerable hardship in the short run.

There are two government schemes which encourage indigenous female sole parents to move into employment. The Jobs, Education and Training (JET) scheme offers assistance to all SPP recipients in accessing education, training and employment opportunities. However, an evaluation undertaken by the DSS suggests that the JET scheme has not been particularly successful in attracting indigenous clients and some of the criticisms are currently being addressed.⁷ The Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) scheme, which has been specifically designed for indigenous Australians, offers the possibility of work experience in an indigenous environment and may in the longer term be a preferred vehicle for developing labour-force skills.

The relative youth of indigenous female sole parents and the larger share which live in rural and remote Australia means that there may be particular problems in providing them with the opportunities to become independent of the welfare system. Given that they represent such a large share of indigenous families with children, the welfare of these families is a major issue for policy makers.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Bob Birrell and Virginia Rapson for their assistance with the 1996 Census data. This paper could not have been written without the benefit of earlier research into the economic status of indigenous families undertaken with Diane Smith.

References
¹ The term indigenous is used here to cover people who identified as Aboriginal or as Torres Strait Islanders in the census.
² A. Daly and D. Smith, 'Indigenous sole parent families: invisible and disadvantaged', CAEPR Discussion Paper no. 134, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University, Canberra, 1997; A. Daly and D. Smith, 'Indigenous sole parent families: welfare dependency and work opportunities', Australian Bulletin of Labour, vol. 24, no. 1, 1998
³ A. Daly, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People in the Labour Market, ABS Occasional Paper, Australian Government Publishing Service (AGPS), Canberra, 1995
⁴ A. Daly and D. Smith, 'The contemporary economic status of indigenous Australian families', Australian Journal of Social Issues, vol. 31, no. 4, 1996, pp. 354-375
⁵ J. Taylor and J. Liu, 'Change in the relative occupational status of indigenous workers, 1986-91', CAEPR Discussion Paper no. 104, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University, Canberra, 1996
⁶ P. Daylight and M. Johnstone, Women's Business, Report of the Aboriginal Women's Task Force, AGPS, Canberra, 1986; J. Finlayson, 'Don't depend on me: autonomy and independence in an Aboriginal community in Northern Queensland', unpublished PhD thesis, Australian National University, Canberra, 1991
⁷ P. Silkstone and J. Peard, 'JET pilot projects -- strategies to improve participation in JET for disadvantaged groups', Social Security Journal, December 1996, pp. 90-107

Back to People and Place Home Page