Getting the mix right: family, community and social policy interventions to improve outcomes for young people at risk of substance misuse

References

• Mitchell P et al. The role of families in the development, identification, prevention and treatment of illicit drug problems. Strategic Research Development Committee— National Illicit Drug Strategy Program. Canberra, ACT: National Health and Medical Research Council, 2001:67.
   Google Scholar
• Spooner C, Hall W, Lynskey M. Structural determinants of youth drug use. Australian National Council on Drugs research paper. Sydney: National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, 2001:79.
   Google Scholar
• Trudgen R. Why warriors lie down and Die. Darwin: Aboriginal Resource and Development Services Inc., 2000:270.
   Google Scholar
• Keating D. Hertzman C. Developmental health and the wealth of nations. New York: Guilford Press, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberg NZ et al. adolescent substance abuse: a review of the past 10 years. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1998; 37: 252–61.
   Google Scholar
• Barker D. Fetal nutrition and cardiovascular disease in later life. Br Med Bull 1997; 53: 96–108.
   Google Scholar
• Power C, Hertzman C. Social and biological pathways linking early life and adult disease. Br Med Bull 1997; 53: 210–21.
   Google Scholar
• McMillen IC, Robinson JS. Developmental origins of the metabolic syndrome: prediction, plasticity, and program- ming. Physiol Rev 2005;85(2):571 – 633.
   Google Scholar
• Majewska MD, Gordon HW, Thadani P. Stress and drug abuse. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2002; 27: 1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Bremner JD et al. MRI-based measurement of hippocam- pal volume in posttraumatic stress disorder related to childhood physical and sexual abuse: a preliminary report. Biol Psychiatry 1997; 41: 23–32.
   Google Scholar
• Bremner J. Does stress damage the brain; understanding trauma-related disorders from a mind-body perspective. New York: WW Norton & Company, 2002:311.
   Google Scholar
• Siegel D. The developing mind. New York: Guilford Press, 1999:394.
   Google Scholar
• Karen R. Becoming attached—first relationships and how they shape our capacity to love. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994:498.
   Google Scholar
• Fonagy P et al. The development of violence and crime as it relates to security of attachment. In: Osofsky JD, ed.Children in a violent society., New York: Guilford Press,1997:150 – 77.
   Google Scholar
• Schore AN. Recent advances in the multidisciplinary study of emotional development. In: Schore AN, ed. Affect regulation and the origin of self: the neurobiology of emotional development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Loxley W et al. The prevention of substance abuse, risk and harm in Australia: a review of the evidence. Canberra: National Drug Research Centre and Centre for Adolescent Health, 2004:315.
   Google Scholar
• Luthar S, ed. Resilience and vulnerability: adaptation in the context of childhood adversities. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2003:574.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy DL et al. Genetic perspectives on the serotonin transporter. Brain Res Bull 2001; 56: 487–94.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett AJ et al. Early experience and serotonin transpor- ter gene variation interact to influence primate CNS function. Mol Psychiatry 2002; 7: 118–22.
   Google Scholar
• Caspi A et al. Influence of life stress on depression: moderation by a polymorphism in the 5-HTT gene. Science 2003; 301: 386–9.
   Google Scholar
• Perry B. Incubated in terror: neurodevelopmental factors in the ‘Cycle of Violence’. In: Osofsky J, ed. Children in a violent society. New York: Guilford Press,1997:124 – 49.
   Google Scholar
• De Bellis M. Developmental traumatology: a contributory mechanism for alcohol and substance use disorders. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2002; 27: 155–70.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon H. Early environmental stress and biological vulnerability to drug abuse. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2002; 27: 115–26.
   Google Scholar
• Meaney MJ, Brake W, Gratton A. Environmental regula- tion of the development of mesolimbic dopamine systems a neurological mechanism for vulnerability to drug abuse? Psychoneuroendocrinology 2002;2002:127 – 38.
   Google Scholar
• Felitti VJ, et al. Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults. Am J Prev Med 1998; 14: 245–58.
   Google Scholar
• Ukeje I, Bendersky M, Lewis M. Mother – infant interaction at 12 months in prenatally cocaine–exposed children. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse 2001; 27: 203–24.
   Google Scholar
• Hans SL, Bernstein VJ, Henson LG. The role of psychopathology in the parenting of drug-dependent women. Devel Psychopathol 1999; 11: 957–77.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman N et al. Rethinking parenting interventions for drug-dependent mothers: from behaviour management to fostering emotional bonds. J Subst Abuse Treat 2004; 27: 179–85.
   Google Scholar
• McKeganey N, Barnard M, McIntosh J. Paying the price for their parents’ addiction: meeting the needs of the children of drug-using parents. Drugs Educ Prev Policy 2002; 9: 233–46.
   Google Scholar
• Centre for Community Child Health, Parenting Informa- tion Project, vol. 1. Main report. Canberra: Department of Family and Community Services, Early Childhood Agen- da, 2004:95.
   Google Scholar
• Fonagy P, Higgitt A. An attachement theory perspective on early influences on development and social inequalities in health. In: Osofsky JD & Fitzgerald HE, eds., WAIMH Handbook of Infant Mental Health: Volume 4 Infant Mental Health in Groups at High Risk. John Wiley & Sons: New York, 2000: 571–578.
   Google Scholar
• Zubrick SR et al. Western Australian Child Health Survey: developing health and wellbeing in the nineties. Perth, Western Australia: Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Institute for Child Health Research, 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Fonagy P. Prevention, the appropriate target of infant psychotherapy. Infant Mental Health J 1998; 19: 124–50.
   Google Scholar
• Bronfenbrenner U. The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979.
   Google Scholar
• Homel R. Developmental pathways to crime prevention. Canberra: Attorney General’s Department, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Hawkins JD et al. Preventing adolescent health-risk behaviors by strengthening protection during childhood. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1999;153:226.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mc Michael A. Human frontiers, environments and disease. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001:413.
   Google Scholar
• Cummins R. Normative life satisfaction: measurement issues and a homeostatic model. Social Indicators Res 2003; 64: 225–56.
   Google Scholar
• Tremblay RE et al. Physical aggression during early childhood: trajectories and predictors. Pediatrics 2004;114:243.
   Google Scholar
• Weatherburn D, Lind B. Delinquent-prone communities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000:211.
   Google Scholar
• Aos S, Lieb R, Mayfield J, Miller M, Pennucci A. Benefits and costs of prevention and early intervention programmes for youth. Washington State Institute for Public Policy: Olympia, 2004:20.
   Google Scholar
• Brazelton T. Touchpoints: Your child’s emotional and behavioral development. New York, NY: Perseus Publish- ing, 1994:469.
   Google Scholar
• Vimpani G. Home visiting for vulnerable infants in Australia. J Paediatr Child Health 2000; 36: 537–9.
   Google Scholar
• Vimpani G. Theoretical frameworks for promoting chil- dren’s development in the early years. Devel Pract 2003; 6: 11–17.
   Google Scholar
• Mustard JF. Early child development and the brain-the base for health, learning, and behavior throughout life. In: Young ME, ed. From early child development to human development. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2002: 23–61.
   Google Scholar
• Zilibowitz M, Blick B. Getting to know you. Sydney: NSW Institute of Psychiatry. 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson S. Society’s investment in children. Adelaide: National Institute of Labour Studies, Inc., Flinders University of South Australia, 2000:34.
   Google Scholar
• Flood M. Lost children: condemning children to long- term disadvantage. Canberra: Australia Institute, 2004:8.
   Google Scholar
• New South Wales Parliament Legislative Council Standing Committee on Social Issues. Inquiry into early interven- tion for children with learning difficulties. Realising potential: final report of the inquiry into early intervention for children with learning difficulties. Chair: Jan Burns- woods. Sydney: Legislative Council. Standing Committee on Social Issues, 2003:99.
   Google Scholar
• Wendorf K.The politicisation of love. Byronchild 2004; 11: 4–7.
   Google Scholar
• Ring I, Brown N. Indigenous health: chronically inade- quate responses to damning statistics. Med J Aust 2002; 177: 629–31.
   Google Scholar
• Vimpani G, Patton G, Hayes A. The relevance of child and adolescent development for outcomes in education, health and life success. What do we know in Australia and elsewhere? Implications for a national research partnership for early human development. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Brown G. Our children are our future. Rowntree Lecture. London: UK Treasury, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Martin P. Address in reply to speech from the Throne. Ottawa: Parliament of Canada, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Coffey C, McCann MN. Commission on early learning and child care for City of Toronto: Final Report. City of Toronto, ON: Toronto. 2002:43.
   Google Scholar
• Heckman J. Policies to foster human capital. National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., Boston MA. 1999:68.
   Google Scholar
• Shergold P. Editorial. In: MA Committee, eds. Connect- ing government: whole of government responses to Australia’s priority challenges. Australian Government Printing Service: Canberra, 2004:v – vi.
   Google Scholar
• Management Advisory Committee. Connecting govern- ment: whole of government responses to Australia’s priority challenges. Canberra: Management Advisory Committee (Australian Government), 2004:254.
   Google Scholar
• Kohen DE, Hertzman C, Brooks-Gunn J. Neighbourhood influences on children’s school readiness. Ottawa: Applied Research Branch, Strategic Policy, Human Resources Development Canada, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson EO. Consilience: the unity of knowledge. New York: Knopf, 1999:352.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Research Council (ARC). Research networks: funding rules for commencing in 2004. Canberra: ARC, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Research Council (ARC). Research Networks approved for funding in 2004. Canberra: ARC, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Shonkoff JP. Science, policy, and practice: three cultures in search of a shared mission. Child Devel 2000; 71: 181–7.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman M. The results and performance accountability implementation guide. Santa Fe, New Mexico: Fiscal Policy Studies Institute, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Love JM et al. Child care quality matters: how conclusions may vary with context. Child Devel 2003; 74: 1021–33.
   Google Scholar
• National Institute of Child Health and Human Develop- ment Early Child Care Research Network. Does amount of time spent in child care predict socioemotional adjustment during the transition to kindergarten? Child Devel 2003; 74: 976–1005.
   Google Scholar
• Schweinhart LJ, Montie J, Xiang Z, Barnett WS, Belfield CR, Nores M. Lifetime effects: the High/Scope Perry Preschool study through age 40. Monographs of the High/ Scope Educational Research Foundation, vol. 14. Ypsi- lanti , MI: High/Scope Press, 2005
   Google Scholar
• Families First. Families first—a better start for children in NSW. Sydney: Cabinet Office, NSW Government, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Olds DL. Prenatal and infancy home visiting by nurses: from randomized trials to community replication. Prev Sci 2002; 3: 153–72.
   Google Scholar
• Olds DL et al. Effects of nurse home-visiting on maternal life course and child development: age 6 follow-up results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics 2004; 114: 1550–9.
   Google Scholar
• McCain M, Mustard F. Reversing the real brain drain— early years study, final report. Toronto: Ontario Children’s Secretariat—Founders’ Network, 1999:182.
   Google Scholar
• David T et al. Birth to three matters—a framework to support children in their earliest years. Literature review. Canterbury and Manchester: Canterbury Christ Church University College and Manchester Metropolitan Univer- sity, 2002:184.
   Google Scholar
• Duggan A et al. Randomized trial of a statewide home visiting program: impact in preventing child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse Neglect 2004; 28: 597–622.
   Google Scholar
• Anisfeld E, Guillen S. Adaptation of the Healthy Families America Program to families affected by drug use: a use of the harm reduction model. The Source: Newsletter of the National Abandoned Infants Resource Center 2001; 11: 12–16.
   Google Scholar
• Grant T et al. Postprogram follow-up effects of paraprofes- sional intervention with high-risk women who abused alcohol and drugs during pregnancy. J Commun Psychol 2003; 31: 211–22.
   Google Scholar
• Olds DL et al. Effects of home visits by paraprofessionals and by nurses: age 4 follow-up results of a randomized trial. Pediatrics 2004; 114: 1560–8.
   Google Scholar
• Olds DL et al. Home visiting by paraprofessionals and by nurses: a randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics 2002; 11: 486–96.
   Google Scholar
• Karoly LA et al. Investing in our children: what we know and don’t know about the costs and benefits of early childhood intervention. Santa Monica, CA: Rand, 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky LS. Mind in society: the development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978.
   Google Scholar
• Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages of change in the modification of problem behaviors. Prog Behav Modif 1992; 28: 183–218.
   Google Scholar
• Love JM et al. Making a difference in the lives of infants and toddlers and their families: the impacts of Early Head Start. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• VandenBoom D. The influence of temperament and mothering on attachment: an exploration of manipulation with sensitive responsiveness among lower class mothers with irritable infants. Child Devel 1994; 65: 1457–77.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson Z et al. Community Mothers Programme—seven year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of non- professional intervention in parenting. J Public Health Med 2000; 2: 337–42.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson Z, Howell F, Molloy B. Community Mothers Programme: randomised controlled trial of non-profes- sional intervention in parenting. Br Med J 1993; 306: 1449–52.
   Google Scholar
• Schuler ME, Nair P, Kettinger L. Drug-exposed infants and developmental outcome: effects of a home interven- tion and ongoing maternal drug use. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2003; 157: 133–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tobler N. Drug prevention programmes can work: research findings. J Addict Dis 1992:11:1 – 28.
   Google Scholar
• Van der Eyken W. Home Start: a four year evaluation. Leicester, UK: Home Start Consultancy, 1982.
   Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Services and AFCA Families. Early Head Start Research and Evaluation (EHSRE) Study, 1996 – 2001. Princeton, NJ: Mathemati- ca Policy Research, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Schweinhart LJ, Barnes HV, Weikart DP et al. Significant benefits: the High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through age 27. Ypsilanti, MI: High Scope Press, 1993
   Google Scholar
• Taylor TK, Biglan A. Behavioural family interventions for improving child-rearing: a review of the literature for clinicians and policy makers. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev1998; 1: 41–60.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders MR. Community-based parenting and family support interventions and the prevention of drug abuse. Addict Behav 2000; 25: 929–42.
   Google Scholar
• Serketich WJ, Dumas JE. The effectiveness of behavioural parent training to modify antisocial behaviour in children: a meta-analysis. Behav Ther 1996; 27: 171–86.
   Google Scholar
• Catalano RF et al. An experimental intervention with families of substance abusers: one-year follow-up of the Focus on Families project. Addiction 1999; 94: 241–54.
   Google Scholar
• Dawe S, Harnett PH, Rendalls V, Staiger P. Improving family functioning and child outcome in methadone maintained families: the Parents Under Pressure Program. Drug Alcohol Rev 2003; 22: 299–309.
   Google Scholar
• McDonald L, Coe-Braddish D, Billingham S. Families and schools together: an innovative substance abuse prevention program. Social Work Educ 1991; 13: 118–29.
   Google Scholar
• DeWitt DJ et al. Evaluating an in-school drug prevention program for at-risk youth. Alberta J Educ Res 2000; 46: 117–33.
   Google Scholar
• Perry C et al. Project Northland: outcomes of a commu- nity-wide alcohol use prevention program during early adolescence. Am J Public Health 1996; 86: 956–65.
   Google Scholar
• Spoth R et al. Protective factors and young adolescent tendency to abstain from alcohol use: a model using two waves of intervention study data. Am J Commun Psychol 1996; 24: 749–70.
   Google Scholar
• Catalano RF et al. A universal intervention for the prevention of substance abuse: preparing for the drug-free years. In: Ashery RS, Robertson EB, Kumpfer KL, eds. Drug abuse prevention through family interventions. Rockville, MD: US Department of Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1998: 130–59.
   Google Scholar
• Spoth R et al. A controlled outcome study examining individual difference and attendance effects. J Marriage Fam 1995; 57: 449–64.
   Google Scholar
• Spoth R, Redmond C. A theory based competency model incorporating intervention attendance effects. Fam Rela- tions 1996; 45: 139–47.
   Google Scholar
• Spoth RL et al. A prospective validation study of inclination, belief and context predictors of family-focused prevention involvement. Fam Process 1997; 36: 403–29.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkin C, Bretherton D. PACE parenting adolescents: a creative experience. Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Hawks D et al. Prevention of psychoactive substance use— a selected review of what works in the area of prevention. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2002:261.
   Google Scholar
• Midford R, Lenton S, Hancock L. A Critical review and analysis: cannabis education in schools. Sydney: NSW Department of Education and Training, 2000
   Google Scholar
• Midford R, Snow P, Lenton S. School-based illicit drug education programmes: a critical review and analysis. Melbourne: Department of Employment, Training and Youth Affairs, Centre for Youth Drug Studies, Australian Drug Foundation, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• White D, Pitts M. Educating young people about drugs: a systematic review. Addiction 1998; 93: 1475–87.
   Google Scholar
• Glover S et al. Social environments and the emotional well-being of young people. Fam Matters 1998; 49: 11–16.
   Google Scholar
• Bond L et al. The Gatehouse Project: can a multilevel school intervention affect emotional well-being and health risk behaviours? J Epidemiol Commun Health 2004; 58: 997–1003.
   Google Scholar
• Bond L et al. Long-term impact of the Gatehouse Project on cannabis use of 16-year-olds in Australia. J School Health 2004; 74: 23–9.
   Google Scholar
• Toumbourou J, Gregg E. Evaluation of program for parents. Parkville, Victoria: Centre for Adolescent Health, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Kumpfer KL et al. Family-focused substance abuse prevention: what has been learned from other fields. In: Ashery RS, Robertson EB, Kumpfer KL, eds. Drug abuse prevention through family interventions. Rockville, MD: US Department of Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1998: 78–102.
   Google Scholar
• Spoth R, Redmond C, Shin C. Direct and indirect latent- variable parenting outcomes of two universal family- focused preventive interventions: extending a public health-oriented base. J Consult Clin Psychol 1998; 66: 385–99.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison S. Final evaluation report on Utah CSAP/CYAP project. Salt Lake City, UT: Social Research Institute, University of Utah, Utah State Division of Substance Abuse, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison RS, Proschauer S. The impact of family skills training on children at risk for substance abuse and their families: a five-year evaluation. Final report. Salt Lake City, UT: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, Social Research Institute, Graduate School of Social Work, 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Dishion TJ, Kavanagh K. A multilevel approach to family- centred prevention in schools: process and outcome. Addict Behav 2000; 25: 899–911.
   Google Scholar
• Egeland B, Erickson MF. Psychologically unavailable caregiving: the effects on development of young children and the implications for prevention. In: Brassard M, Hart S, Germain B, eds. Psychological maltreatment of children and youth. New York, NY: Pergamon Press, 1987;110 – 20.
   Google Scholar
• Egeland B, Erickson MF. Rising above the past: strategies for helping new mothers to break the cycle of abuse and neglect. Zero to Three 1990; 11: 29–35.
   Google Scholar
• DeMarsh JK, Kumpfer KL. Family environmental and genetic influences on children’s future chemical depen- dency. J Child Contemp Soc Adv Theory Appl Res 1985; 18: 117–25.
   Google Scholar
• Bry BH et al. Scientific Findings from family prevention intervention research. In: Ashery RS, Robertson EB, Kumpfer KL, eds. Drug abuse prevention through family interventions. Rockville, MD: US Department of Human Services, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1998: 103–29.
   Google Scholar
• Lochman JE, Wells KA. A social-cognitive intervention with aggressive children: prevention effects and contextual implementation issues. In: Peters RD, McMahon RJ, eds. Childhood disorders, substance abuse and delinquency: prevention and early intervention approaches. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1996: 90–110.
   Google Scholar
• Bry BH, Conboy C, Bisgay K. Decreasing adolescent drug use and school failure: long-term effects of targeted family- problem-solving training. Child Fam Behav Ther 1986; 8: 43–59.
   Google Scholar
• Henggeler SW, Melton GB, Smith LA. Family preserva- tion using multisystemic treatment: an effective alternative to incarcerating serious juvenile offenders. J Consult Clin Psychol 1992; 60: 953–61.
   Google Scholar
• Santos AB et al. Research on field-based services: models for reform in the delivery of mental health care to populations with complex clinical problems. Am J Psy- chiatry 1995; 152: 1111–23.
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham PB, Henggeler SW. Engaging multiproblem families in treatment: lessons learned throughout the development of Multisystemic Therapy. Fam Process 1999; 38: 265–81.
   Google Scholar
• Blyth A, Bamberg J, Toumbourou J. Behaviour exchange systems training: a program for parents stressed by adolescent substance abuse. Camberwell, Victoria: Aus- tralian Council for Educational Research, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Bamberg J et al. Change for the BEST: family changes for parents coping with youth substatnce abuse. Aust NZ J Fam Ther 2001; 22: 189–98.
   Google Scholar
• Szapocsnik J, Kurtines WM. Breakthroughs in family therapy with drug-abusing and problem youth. New York, NY: Springer, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Davis H, Day C, Bidmead C. Working in partnership with parent; the parent adviser model. London: Psychological Corporation, 2002:289.
   Google Scholar
• Loxey W, Toumbourou J, Stockwell T. A new integrated vision of how to prevent harmful drug use. Med J Aust 2005; 182: 54–5.
   Google Scholar
• National Mental Health Strategy. Promotion, prevention and early intervention for mental health. Canberra: Department of Health and Aged Care, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke M, Stewart J. Handling the wicked issues—a challenge for government—discussion paper. Birmingham, UK: School of Public Policy, University of Birmingham, June, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Vimpani GV. Sure Start: reflections from Down Under. Child Care Health and Devel 2002; 28: 281–7.
   Google Scholar
• Manitoba HC. Annual report. Winnipeg, 2003:28.
   Google Scholar
• Glass N. Surely some mistake. Guardian, London, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Gordon M. Roots of empathy: responsive parenting, caring societies. Keio J Med 2003; 52: 236–43.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson L. Rigby K. Countering bullying at an Australian secondary school with students as helpers. J Adolesc 1999; 22: 481–92.
   Google Scholar
• Lacourse E et al. A longitudinal – experimental approach to testing theories of antisocial behavioural development. Devel Psychopathol 2002; 14: 909–24.
   Google Scholar
• Saunders P. Getting poverty back on the policy agenda. Smith Family Research and Social Policy Team Briefing Paper 2002: 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Harding A, Lloyd R, Greenwell H. Financial disadvantage in Australia 1990 to 2000: the persistence of poverty in a decade of growth. Sydney: Smith Family, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Edmund Rice Centre. The changing face of poverty in Australia. Just Comment 2002;5(4):1 – 2.
   Google Scholar
• Edmund Rice Centre. What will sorry mean for Australia. Just Comment 2002;3(9):1 – 2.
   Google Scholar
• Strauch B. The primal teen. New York: Doubleday, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Thadani P. The intersection of stress, drug abuse and development. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2002;27:221 –30.
   Google Scholar
• Eckenrode J. et al. Preventing child abuse and neglect with a program of nurse home visitation: the limiting effects of domestic violence. JAMA 2000; 284: 1385–91.
   Google Scholar
• Meyers K et al. What does it take to retain substance- abusing adolescents in research protocols? Delineation of effort required, strategies undertaken, costs incurred, and 6-month post-treatment differences by retention difficulty. Drug Alcohol Depend 2003; 69: 73–85.
   Google Scholar