In narratives of displaced Karen women from Burma, both before and after resettlement in Australia, women framed their birthing experiences with those of persecution and displacement. Although grateful for the security of resettlement in Australia, social inclusion was negligible and women's birthing experiences occurred in that context. Women described the impact of the lack of interpreting services in Australian hospitals and an absence of personal and communal care that they expected. Frequently, this made straightforward births confusing or difficult, and exacerbated the distress of more complicated births. Differences in individual responses related to women's histories, with younger women displaying more preparedness to complain and identify discrimination. The problems identified with health care, coupled with the inability of many of the women to complain requires attention, not just within the health care system, but more widely as part of social attitudes concerning Australia's obligations to those who seek asylum.

Since the early 1990s, Malaysian society has displayed a deepening concern over steady increases in reported cases of child abuse in the country. For many Malaysians, knowledge of this issue comes from the mainstream media. This research analyses media coverage of child abuse in two mainstream English-language daily newspapers throughout 2010. The analysis focuses on how this issue is presented and ‘framed’ in the media. Through the use of simple episodic framing and a distorted focus on extreme cases of child abuse, media coverage internationally obscures the reality of child abuse as it occurs within the context of contemporary social, cultural, religious or political systems. This hinders any genuine understanding of the problem, leading to flawed solutions. We find these international patterns largely replicated in Malaysia. Furthermore, gendered socialization processes in Malaysia make women and mothers principally responsible for family life and there is a tendency to blame and punish mothers for child abuse even when they are not the perpetrators. Internationally, child welfare experts and academics have advised the media to focus reporting on the underlying causes of abuse so that the issue can be better understood and addressed and this advice is pertinent for Malaysia today.

This project sought to inform priority setting in Australian suicide prevention research, by empirically examining existing priorities and by seeking stakeholders' views on where future priorities might lie. Existing priorities were examined via reviews of Australian literature published and grants funded during the life of the National Suicide Prevention Strategy (1999-2006). Stakeholders' views of future priorities were elicited via a questionnaire administered to 11 groups comprising 231 individuals with an interest in suicide prevention. The study identified 263 journal articles and 36 grants. The journal articles most commonly reported on studies of descriptive epidemiology, while the grants tended to fund intervention studies. Both gave roughly equal weight to completed and attempted suicide, and gave little emphasis to studies of suicide methods. Young people were the most frequently-researched target group, with people with mental health problems and people who had attempted suicide or deliberately self-harmed also receiving attention. Stakeholders indicated that emphasis should be given to intervention studies, and that completed suicide and attempted suicide are both important. In terms of suicide method, they felt the focus should be on poisoning by drugs and hanging. They had mixed views about the target groups that should be afforded priority, although young people and people with mental health problems were frequently ranked highly. This paper presents a picture of the current focus with regard to suicide prevention research, identifying some areas where there are clear gaps and others where relatively greater efforts have been made. By combining this information with stakeholders' views of where future priorities should lie, the paper provides some guidance as to the shape a future suicide prevention research agenda for Australia should take. A strategic approach to suicide prevention research will help fill internationally-identified gaps in knowledge about what works and what doesn't work in suicide prevention.

No abstract

The current study sought to inform priority setting in Australian suicide prevention research, by seeking stakeholders' views on where future priorities might lie. Three group interviews were conducted with a total of 28 participants. Group interview participants stressed that priority should be given to evaluating the efficacy of specific interventions and examining the response of the health and community service systems. They felt that the epidemiological profile of suicidal individuals had been explored, at least with respect to rates and individual-level risk factors, and that the above evaluative activities should focus on groups identified as having particularly high levels of risk. Most saw limited value in continuing to explore individual-level risk factors ad infinitum, and felt that the time had come to move on to considering wider societal influences on suicide and individual-level protective factors. Many felt that evaluation efforts should employ mixed methods, should be multidisciplinary and should be relevant to the Australian context. They also argued that there was scope for increasing the utility of research findings by communicating them in a manner that would enable them to be utilised by policy-makers, planners and practitioners. Several called for a more cohesive framework for suicide prevention that could guide suicide prevention research. The current study provides some guidance with respect to the direction Australia's suicide prevention research agenda should take. A prioritydriven approach to suicide prevention research will ensure that the research endeavour provides the most useful information for those whose day-today work involves trying to prevent suicide.