FAMILIES SA

The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON (15:08): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the minister representing the Minister for Families and Communities a question about Families SA.

Leave granted.

The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON: On 25 May this year, I asked a series of questions concerning the case of a mother desperately seeking assistance for her son who has severe behavioural problems. Believing it to be the only option open to her, she entered into a three-month voluntary agreement with Families SA in 2007. After that, Families SA stated that it would be better able to care for the child and sought a guardianship order until the child reaches the age of 18. Referring to the lack of support services provided to the boy and his deteriorating behaviour since being in care, in March I asked the minister the following:

When a child in the care of the minister in a residential facility is not attending school, is staying out all night during the week and on weekends and is arrested for criminal activity at the age of 12, what guarantee will the minister provide the mother—a caring and loving mother—that the situation will improve, and what oversight will be provided to guarantee the care and protection of that child under those circumstances?

Since asking that question, the mother, who previously enjoyed regular unsupervised access, has been denied all access to her son, with no reasonable explanation given. Despite no safety concerns being raised directly about the mother, she has been told that, when access resumes, it will be strictly supervised.

Additionally, the mother is being denied basic information about her son's welfare, including whether he is incarcerated and outcomes of court proceedings, and has recently been told that she will not be able to attend the Youth Court when her son faces criminal charges in August. Her once friendly relations with staff at the son's residential facility have been severed, with the mother being told that she is to make no contact whatsoever with that facility. The time line between when I asked the question in this place and the restrictions mentioned being placed on the mother's access was just 24 hours. This is by no means the first occasion that a constituent has suffered retribution for seeking my assistance on these matters.

In a meeting on 3 June and then again in a letter on 2 July, I endeavoured to seek an explanation from the Executive Director of Families SA as to why the mother's access was cut, and I have expressed my concerns that the reasons may be vindictive and an attempt to limit an information flow about this child's welfare. My questions to the minister are:

1. Will she explain why, the day after I asked a question in parliament, this mother's access was suspended and she was instructed not to contact her son's residential facility at all?

2. Will she consult with the Executive Director of Families SA to determine the reason for the inordinate delay in responding to my concerns?

3. Will she instruct Families SA to allow the mother to attend the Youth Court proceedings in order to be able to support her son?

4. Will she provide a response to the concerns raised about the care and support the boy is receiving still while in state care?

The Hon. G.E. GAGO (Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for the Status of Women, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Government Enterprises, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (15:11): I thank the honourable member for her important questions and will refer them to the Minister for Families and Communities in another place and bring back a response.