AN EXTERNAL CHILD AND YOUTH ADVOCATE

Nova Scotia does not have a child and youth advocate contrary to most other provinces. Is a child advocate necessary to address the current system of service for children and youth? Are there enough checks and balances already in the system to ensure that persistent problems get addressed? If childhood is seen on a continuum with interventions beginning from birth to three years, at preschool/day care, at the entrance to the education system (primary, junior high and senior high), and finally on to adulthood, can we identify the children and youth who are repeatedly left out? If we look first at the vivid examples of youth at the end of the spectrum such as their mental health, involvement in crime, unmanageable/aggressive/self-destructive behaviour, sexual violence, bullying and cyberbullying, and the impact of social media to mention a few, it becomes obvious that intervention needs to occur early in the childhood cycle. If we could intervene early we might be able to identify those children who will develop problems later in life.

The government has at least two strategies that have been developed to address the problems of children and youth. The Child and Youth Strategy, “Our Children are Worth It” (2007) developed after the Nunn Commission Enquiry Report (2006) recommended a stronger collaboration and cooperation between the four government departments of Community Services, Health and Wellness, Education and Early Childhood Development, and Justice. The Child and Youth Strategy makes an honest effort to find new ways of providing services to children and youth, some of which are experimental, that tries to make access easier and to fill gaps. Its legacy will be a more coordinated approach to service provision from the top government level to the service provider at the community level.

Over the past six years the Child and Youth Strategy has experimented with a number of initiatives that have been tested and found to meet qualitative tests to show their effectiveness. One of those initiatives is the SchoolsPlus program which was started under the Child and Youth Strategy and later adopted and expanded by the Mental Health and Addictions Strategy, “Together We Can” (2012) under the Department of Health and Wellness.

The SchoolsPlus program follows the lead of several other national and international jurisdictions. It uses the school as a platform to launch services to meet the needs of children, youth and families as well as traditional education. An important initiative of the program is the placement of mental health clinicians in SchoolsPlus schools. This is particularly significant in rural communities where resources are scarce or located at long distances.  The program offers a familiar space for families to meet and encourages the co-location of community-based services.  However, how effective is this program in terms of early identification of learning, developmental and mental health problems? Does it provide better access to services? Are gaps in services for certain services identified? Does it diminish long wait times for services? Is it adequately resources with qualified professionals? All these questions depend on adequate financial resources. Is the government committed to provide these resources without which the program and strategy may fail?

Shedding light on these questions is where an independent Child and Youth Advocate with a broad mandate would be effective. The government strategies have made progress and have identified the direction that needs to be taken in order to meet the needs of children, youth and families. What is required now is an independent authority with broad powers to investigate complaints about the system, gather information, analyse outcomes, report its findings and recommendations to the Legislature, and to encourage government to make changes. Some gaps in services that persist and continue to impact child and youth mental health are: relevant and accessible information programs that address problems parents encounter raising their children; follow-up of high risk children between the ages of three and five when home visits end and until they enter school; children under 12 who commit crimes of violence or destroy property but cannot be charged; high risk youth between 16 and 18 years who are between the child welfare mandate and age of majority; children’s over exposure to the viewing of violence in films and video games; the influence of social media on individual and family relationships; the service gaps between different geographic regions especially in rural areas; and service gaps in programs for diverse cultures. The strategies have addressed some of these gaps but an advocate for children and youth could independently identify and focus attention on the ones requiring urgent attention.

A child and youth advocate would provide the oversight that would identify gaps in services as experienced by the service users. It’s time for Nova Scotia to join the other eight provinces with advocates in place to independently examine the strategies to address problems expressed by children and youth and to advocate for effective change.