Understanding Social Inclusion - Values And Principles Of Community Work In Australia

Research and report on one of the values and principles (listed below) underpinning community work in Australia.

Students are required to provide a definition, summarise important historical events relevant to current values and principles, and identify current ethical and/or legislation requirements relevant to the chosen value and principle.

Students can choose one value and principle from this list.

Empowerment

OR

Social inclusion

Historical Events Relevant to Current Values and Principles

Several influences have begun through the social enterprise in Australia. Community organizations have been providing services to poor people and people who are marginalized (Taylor, 2015). In the year 2008 Australian government announced a program named as social inclusion program to achieve several aims. The program involves the approach that community legal centers give to dealing with communities as well as communities who are faced with legal problems that result as their disadvantages such as the principle of self-empowerment, community development, early engagement and stakeholder partnership. The reason government announced the program was due to the deep-rooted issue of unequal distribution (Ho, 2013). The aim of the report is to understand the concept of social inclusion along with the relevant historical events and current ethical and legislative aspects.

There is no existing definition of social inclusion that is universally accepted. According to the Australia social inclusion board, it is possessing the resources, opportunities and capacities to:

•    Learn, such as participating in learning and education

•    Work, such as engage in employment and any other unpaid or voluntary work involving

•    Engage, such as connecting with people, using local services and participating in local, civic, cultural, recreational activities.

•    Having a voice, such as taking part in altering decisions that will affect them (McLachlan, Gilfillan & Gordon, 2013).

The definition provided by UNESCO has intended to highlight the values of human rights in a society that is socially inclusive. According to UNESCO, inclusive society can be defined as a society for everyone, where each person has a purpose. It is a society that is based on basic values of equity, equality, social justice and human rights and freedoms and also on the laws of tolerance and embracing heterogeneity (Hardy & Woodcock, 2015).

Experiencing discrimination can lead to several problems such as poor health and in both mentally and physically. Discrimination on various aspect has been happening since a several years and along with time modifications are being made. It is known that racism is one factor that directly and indirectly excludes people from accessing resources which is everyone’s fundamental rights. Discrimination limits people who differ from the majority from participating in employment, education, sports and social activities. These issues results as disadvantages to a portion of the society and therefore it is considered a major social issue.

In the year 1948, the international community coming together endorsed the universal declaration of human rights. The document had outlined the basic social, economic, political, cultural and civil rights that every human is entitled. Also, it stated that no matter who they are or where they reside every person is equally liable to enjoy the freedoms (Kidd, 2013).

Current Ethical and/or Legislation Requirements Relevant to Social Inclusion

It was in the year 2010 when the Australian Human rights commission conducted a human rights review and social inclusion in African Australian communities. Several factors were been noticed in the research. Issues such as lack of housing, limited employment opportunities and access to education were highlighted and considered the major barrier for them (Spaaij, 2013).

Although while adoption it was only an aspirational document and not any statutory duties on state, it was adopted as a reflection of the fundamental values and principles which were accorded by all the member of the international community. Also, it has seen an extraordinary development after the adaptation in the international, regional and bilateral human rights treaties, a legal jurisprudence that was developed by UN monitoring bodies and state laws. Australia has been a good global citizen and been closely associated with the improvement of human rights. It is through these proceedings that today the issue of social inclusion is highlighted (Pegram, 2015).

Currently, The Australian community workers association has set several code of ethics and regard them as the benchmark. The main principles underlying the code of ethics are:

• Every human being is equal despite religion, race, gender, age, sexual diversity or any other differences. Every soul has the right to maximise his or her potential until it affects another individual.
• Social inclusion is considered as the human right, and it involves the active role of every person along with a full expectation of social, educational, economic participation. An inclusive society is defined by the fundamental values of equality, equity, human rights, freedom and social justice along with the principle of embracing and tolerating heterogeneity.
• It is the responsibility of an inclusive society to provide and deal with equitability. Any person being exclusive of these basic rights should be looked after by the inclusive society.
• On the basis of age, sex, race and their disability every person is protected against discrimination legally.
• The Australian community workers association recognizes Australia’s first people and rights of self-determination to them (Garran & Werkmeister Rozas, 2013). Apart from the mention practices that are present currently there are need for more ethical and legislative norms. In the economical perspective there is a lack of participation. Government is concerned about the social exclusion as it has become certainly a barrier for the poorer to reach the opportunities society and government provides. Government has several benefits that is equal for every citizen regardless of their race, ethnicity, gender or any other aspect. However, people are still unable to access services. Social inclusion is determined by the identification of minor rates of participation in the formal economy within certain groups in the society. Therefore, the aim is to lift the participation rates that is lower and improve the economic performance. Currently government aims to reduce the government expenditure of income support benefits. This is a method that requires far reaching change in attitude and structure of the society (Persson et al., 2015).

In the societal perspective, marginalized and disenfranchised people in social inclusion are perceived to be more trustful while building relationship. The important term that is important in here is ‘Building social capital’ (Ellis & Abdi, 2017). The community work needs to be influential in order to achieve social inclusion.it is specifically the interactional approach that is required to bring the sections and divisions of community together.

Conclusion:

Currently, the community work that takes place is extremely complex with several challenges. In involves social, economic and political forces in various ways making it intertwined with one aspect to another. It is not only a national level issue but also international. With the growing globalization, the associate force make the access to the equality impossible and out of reach. However, through the help of the report it can be understood that it is possible with right approach. The social inclusive is possible when the attitude of people and the people who are privileged in respect to social position, economic background and the right thought process can help eliminating the problem. Also, with several private, public and non-governmental bodies have made possible several positive changes. Therefore the social inclusive society is a possible image to picture by everyone.

References:

Ellis, B. H., & Abdi, S. (2017). Building community resilience to violent extremism through genuine partnerships. American Psychologist, 72(3), 289.

Garran, A. M., & Werkmeister Rozas, L. (2013). Cultural competence revisited. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 22(2), 97-111.

Hardy, I., & Woodcock, S. (2015). Inclusive education policies: Discourses of difference, diversity and deficit. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 19(2), 141-164.

Ho, C. (2013). From social justice to social cohesion: a history of Australian multicultural policy. 'For those who've come across the seas': Australian multicultural theory, policy and practice.

Kidd, B. (2013). A new social movement: Sport for development and peace. In Sport and Foreign Policy in a Globalizing World (pp. 36-46). Routledge.

McLachlan, R., Gilfillan, G., & Gordon, J. (2013). Deep and persistent disadvantage in Australia. Canberra: Productivity Commission.

Pegram, T. (2015). Global human rights governance and orchestration: National human rights institutions as intermediaries. European Journal of International Relations, 21(3), 595-620.

Spaaij, R. (2013). Cultural diversity in community sport: An ethnographic inquiry of Somali Australians’ experiences. Sport Management Review, 16(1), 29-40.

Taylor, J. (2015). Working with Communities. South Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press.

Persson, H., Åhman, H., Yngling, A. A., & Gulliksen, J. (2015). Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts—one goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14(4), 505-526.