How Big is the Gap in Wellbeing between Marginalised and Non-Marginalised Young People as They Approach Adolescence? Evidence from a National Survey of 9–14 Year Old Australians
Gerry Redmond (),
Jasmine Huynh and
Additional contact information
Gerry Redmond: Flinders University
Jasmine Huynh: University of South Australia
Vanessa Maurici: Flinders University
Child Indicators Research, 2018, vol. 11, issue 2, 459-485
Abstract While research shows that wellbeing among disadvantaged or marginalised young people is often low, few analyses compare wellbeing across different groups of young people recognised by policy as marginalised, and the non-marginalised. This paper examines the extent to which wellbeing varies across five marginalised groups (young people with disability, young carers, materially disadvantaged young people, young people from non-English speaking background, and Indigenous young people) and the non-marginalised. Analysis was conducted on data from a nationally representative sample of 9–14 year old Australians in school years 4, 6 and 8 (N = 5440), designed following extensive consultations with young people. Their perspectives shaped the construction of the wellbeing index, operationalised using 12 indicators within domains of family, peer relationships, health, school, and life satisfaction. Analysis found a significant gap in wellbeing between young people with disability, young carers and materially disadvantaged young people on the one hand, and the non-marginalised on the other. Analysis also found gaps between Indigenous young people and the non-marginalised but these were mostly not significant. However, there was little difference in wellbeing between young people from non-English speaking background and the non-marginalised. For four of the five groups, gaps were larger among 13–14 year olds than among 9–12 year olds. Young people from non-English speaking backgrounds were exceptions in this respect. Latent Class Analysis was used to identify different wellbeing clusters. Odds of three marginalised groups (with disability, carers and materially disadvantaged) being in the lowest wellbeing cluster were particularly high, after controlling for other factors. However, half of those in the lowest wellbeing cluster were not in any of the marginalised groups. The analysis concludes that young people’s wellbeing can best be enhanced through universalist policies that seek to include everyone rather than only through targeting specific groups.
Keywords: Wellbeing index; Wellbeing clusters; Marginalised groups; Inequality; Australia; Latent class analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12187-016-9432-9 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:chinre:v:11:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s12187-016-9432-9
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... f-life/journal/12187
Access Statistics for this article
Child Indicators Research is currently edited by Asher Ben-Arieh
More articles in Child Indicators Research from Springer, The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI)
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla ().