Flashpoints & Signposts: Pathwaysto success and wellbeing for

Australia’s young people

Richard Eckersley, Ani Wierenga, Johanna Wyn

March 2006

A project by Australia 21 and the Australian Youth Research Centre,funded and supported by VicHealth

2

Contact details:

Australia 21 LtdPO Box 3244Weston ACT 2611

Phone: +61 2 6288 0823Email: office@australia21.org.auWeb: http://www.australia21.org.au

Australian Youth Research CentreFaculty of EducationUniversity of Melbourne VIC 3010

Phone: +61 3 8344 9633Email: yrc@edfac.unimelb.edu.auWeb: http://www.edfac.unimelb.edu.au/eesc/yrc/

VicHealthPO Box 154Carlton South VIC 3053

Phone: +61 3 9667 1333Email: vichealth@vichealth.vic.gov.auWeb: http://www.vichealth.vic.gov.au

3

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the following people to this project:

• Dr John Ainley, Australian Council for Educational Research• Ms Rosemary Aird, University of Queensland• Prof Lois Bryson, RMIT• Dr Jane Dixon, Australia 21 and ANU• Dr Gary Marks, Australian Council for Educational Research• Prof Janet McCalman, University of Melbourne• Dr Julie McLeod, Deakin University• Assoc Prof Elisabeth Northam, Royal Children’s Hospital• Prof George Patton, University of Melbourne• Prof Margot Prior, University of Melbourne• Ms Diana Smart, Australian Institute of Family Studies• Dr John Spierings, Dusseldorp Skills Forum• Assoc Prof David Tacey, La Trobe University• Ms Irene Verins, VicHealth• Mr Dan Woodman, University of Melbourne.

The authors are also grateful to Ms Julie Marr, University of Melbourne, for assistancewith the report and Ms Helen Cahill, University of Melbourne, for editorial suggestions.

4

5

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 7Introduction 11

Background 11Synthesis 12

Overview 13Socio-economics, gender and history 19

A historical perspective 20The Life-Patterns Project 20Other research 23

Two worlds 25Story and practices of ‘storying’ 26Two worlds, and the space in between 27Individual and shared stories 30

Cultures, values, futures and spirit 31Trends towards materialism and individualism 33Values 34Future visions 36Religion and spirit 37

Implications and future directions 40Flashpoints: Issues for further research 41Signposts for research and policy 42

Appendix 45Research Panel 45Research Panel Workshops 45Youth Policy Workshop 45

References 46

6

7

Executive Summary

This report draws together the findingsof a cross-disciplinary project carriedout by Australia 21, a non-profitresearch company, and the AustralianYouth Research Centre, and funded byVicHealth. It involved a process ofsynthesis and sought a betterunderstanding of the points ofconvergence and divergence in thecommentaries and evidence relating toyoung people's wellbeing. Bothconvergence and divergence provideroutes out of the confinement oftraditional research boundaries, but thelatter may be especially important toresearchers and policy makers as ithighlights different ways of seeingthings.

The project suggests a need for agreater focus in both research andpolicy on the following issues: the 'bigpicture' of the broad social changesreshaping life today; holisticapproaches to health and wellbeing(rather than just a focus on ill health); awhole of population approach, (ratherthan just a concern with themarginalised and at-risk); andconsideration of the social and culturalresources, as well as the material andeconomic resources, that impact onwellbeing.

Perceptions of young people's healthand wellbeing vary greatly, reflectingdifferences between disciplines,ideologies and generations. Youngpeople are seen to be resilient,adaptable and doing well and, at thesame time, experiencing increasedrates of some important mental andphysical health problems. The widerange of views reflects: highlyfragmented and narrow disciplinaryresearch perspectives, which areusually based on a limited evidence

base; an incomplete understanding of acomplex picture; and ideological,generational and other sources of biasand prejudice.

On the one hand, young people areresilient, adapting to changing socialconditions, adjusting goals andexpectations to suit their times. Health,measured by life expectancy andmortality, continues to improve. Over80 per cent of young people say insurveys that they are healthy, happyand satisfied with their lives.

On the other hand, many young peopleare not faring well. More young peopleare overweight or obese and inactive,placing them at risk of a wide range ofhealth problems later in life, includingdiabetes, heart disease and somecancers. A fifth to a third of youngpeople are experiencing significantpsychological stress and distress at anyone time, with some estimates of theprevalence of a more general malaisereaching 50 per cent.

Some of the conflicting views andcontradictory evidence on youngpeople and their world - for example,the apparent optimism and wellbeingexpressed by young people whose liveswould appear, according to objectivecriteria, to be fairly negative – can beexplained. Responses to questionsabout happiness and life satisfactionreflect people’s adaptability and atendency to take their situation as agiven and assess their wellbeing withinthat context. Conversely, whatresearchers consider a health ‘problem’or ‘risk’ is not what many youngpeople would regard as a problem andcould even be considered as part ofenjoying life. For example, drug usecan bee seen as an adaptive response tolife’s pressures; it is also part of the‘good life’ popular culture promotes.

8

However, tensions– ‘flashpoints’ –remained because different disciplinesoften draw on different evidence anduse different conceptual frameworks tointerpret the evidence. Projectparticipants – and even we, the authorsof this report – did not agree on pointssuch as: whether trends in wellbeingcan be generalised; the extent to whichdifferent measures and findings can beexplained and reconciled; the relativeimportance of social influences andindividual capacities in determiningwellbeing; and whether potential andwellbeing are separate and distinct.

The project sought to go beyond thedominant statistically based portraits ofyouth, including epidemiologicalstudies framed around risk andprotective factors. It focused on three,overlapping, areas: (1) how social,economic and cultural changesintersect with socio-economic andgender differences to produce differentoutcomes for different groups insociety; (2) how young people respondto social change and the way theytranslate this complex process into anarrative or life story; and (3) howcultural ‘intangibles’ which are hard tomeasure, and so tend to be overlookedin research, shape potential andwellbeing.

A key issue to emerge from theanalysis is the importance of the waythat social changes, including theprocesses of social fragmentation andindividualisation, have increaseduncertainty in young people’s lives.This uncertainty underscores a need tomake sense of it all, and ‘make a life’for one’s self. Young people maketheir lives by using various resources,especially those drawn from trustedrelationships, to create storylines aboutwho they are and where their lives areleading. The results of their narratives,or ‘storying’ are visible over time:

different understandings shape the wayindividuals engage in the world, theway they engage shapes experience,and experience, in turn, shapesunderstandings.

Social, economic and cultural changesfeed into this narrative process incomplex ways which cannot easily becaptured in statistical associations.While the costs and benefits of socialchange are not evenly distributed in theyouth population, nor are theyconfined to particular groups. Costs arebeing incurred across the socialspectrum – from unemployed, poorlyeducated young men who are beingexcluded from social participation, toprivileged, well-educated youngwomen who are experiencingconsiderable stress because of high,and sometimes conflicting,expectations and aspirations. Changesthat affect everyone can, therefore,affect people differently and contributeto specific problems that only someexperience.

A central issue is not so much howyoung people are coping with, oradapting to, these changes, but howand under what conditions youngpeople’s wellbeing is maximised. Thedevelopment of 'resilience' and 'thecapacity to cope or adapt' implies anexposure to potentially adversesituations and circumstances. Thatmost young people possess thesequalities doesn't mean the effects ofsocial change on human health andpotential can be ignored.

Conversations with practitioners andpolicy makers in the youth sector haverevealed that, in terms of doing justiceto the challenges of workingholistically, easy solutions, simpleformulas and neat guidelines that glossover differences in perspectives do notwork. A push into inter-disciplinary

9

work means entering a newer territorythat requires its own process andconceptual development.

In this project we (the authors) haveattempted to do justice to somealternative viewpoints and voices, andto identify some of the challenges ofcross-disciplinary work. This hasmeant both acknowledging complexityand disagreements (flashpoints), andseeking shared implications anddirections for policy (signposts).Recognising a need of each other’sperspective for a holistic understandingmeans continuing to explore the keyissues in dialogue.

Several ‘signposts’ – pointers forfuture research and policydevelopment – emerged from theproject. These include the need formore focus or emphasis on thefollowing:

The big picture – young people in context:The ongoing impact of social changeon successive generations places aresponsibility on researchers todocument and analyse these changes.Policy makers must also ensure thatyoung people’s lives are not beinginterpreted from the viewpoint of ideasand conditions that are now outmoded.Young people’s own interpretationsprovide important insights into manycontemporary issues. Without suchinput, policies, interventions andservices for young people are likely tobe fragmented and out of step withtheir lives.

Wellbeing: A holistic focus on healthand wellbeing is especially importantin the area of youth policy because: (1)it retains a link with ‘big-picture’issues; (2) it focuses on pathways to‘living well’ as a universal measure, aswell as acknowledging the need tofocus on particular risk groups and

problems; and (3) it provides aframework for crossing sectoralboundaries and identifies the points ofpermeability between disciplines andsectors. It also highlights the need for a‘whole of life’ approach: all policybecomes youth policy.

The mainstream: The pace of socialchange has outstripped the usefulnessof the idea of a ‘mainstream’ of youngpeople who are ‘OK’ and anidentifiable minority who are ‘at risk’and require targeting. At some time,most individuals will face difficulties(for example, a period of depression orunemployment). The implication isthat both targeted and universal policymeasures and interventions arenecessary.

Social and cultural resources: Researchhas shown a strong inter-generationaleffect on people’s life chances,reflecting differential access tomaterial and cultural resources. Otherresearch reveals the significance ofnarratives or ‘stories’ that enableindividuals to connect their lives withpeople around them and to make senseof their world. Trust is essential to thisprocess. From a policy point of view,this finding indicates the importance ofsupporting the development of socialand cultural resources, as well as theeconomic and material resources.

Inter-disciplinary dialogue and groundingimplications for policy and practice: Thisproject has highlighted the potential ofsupported dialogue within and betweensome key groups: researchers (fromacross different disciplines), policymakers and professionals (across theyouth and community sector). Twoareas of possibility have emerged:firstly further shared inquiries andinter-disciplinary synthesis aroundspecific areas related to young people’swellbeing; and secondly exploring

10

processes for knowledge translationfrom synthesis, to signposts, to policyand practice.

In terms of drawing down theimplications from this project, there ismore work to be done; through thesesignposts we have simply begun thetask.

Importantly, the findings of this workhighlight that the most effective policyresponses will not be simply aboutattempting to enhance young people’sresilience, flexibility and adaptabilityand so to mould them to suit changing

social circumstances. Realising youngpeople’s potential and optimising theirwellbeing also mean shaping socialconditions to suit their needs.

These signposts signal the need toacknowledge that broad social changesdo not ‘just happen’, but flow from thechoices people make, individually andcollectively; to question the often-assumed links between means and endsthat underpin these changes; and toallow time for reflection, forconversations about the things thatmatter, and for asking questions aswell as seeking solutions.

11

Introduction

This report is the final outcome of aproject whose purpose was to identifyways to help young Australians tooptimise their wellbeing and to realisetheir full potential against abackground of often adverse trends intheir physical and psychosocial healthand wellbeing.

The project was initiated by Australia21, a non-profit company establishedto promote interdisciplinary and cross-institutional networks on importantchallenges facing Australia. The YouthResearch Centre at the University ofMelbourne was a collaborator in theproject, which was funded byVicHealth.

BackgroundThe project brought togetherresearchers involved in severallongitudinal studies of children andyouth, together with others who arecontributing to the work in this area.The initial aims were: to identifyimportant consistencies,complementarities and contradictionsin the study data, focusing on broadersocial, economic and cultural factors;to formulate key research questionsthat address identified gaps in theknowledge and understanding of thedeterminants of young people’swellbeing and potential; and to attemptto answer some of these questionsusing the existing data sets.

The reasons for focusing onlongitudinal studies included that: theyrepresented an existing, but under-usedresource, with scope for further dataanalysis; they were, at least to someextent, based in different disciplines –sociology, psychology, epidemiology –so had good prospects for cross-fertilisation; some were continuing, so

there was the potential to addcomponents to address questionsidentified in the workshops; and itlimited the group to a manageablenumber, so was likely to be moreproductive.

The research panel met twice, in Mayand November 2004, with workcontinuing between and since theseworkshops. A third workshop was heldfor policy people and youthprofessionals in June 2005 to considerthe policy implications of the project.As the project proceeded, the emphasischanged for several reasons. We didnot want to duplicate other,comprehensive reports on thewellbeing of children and youth,including the Australian Institute ofHealth and Welfare reports on youngpeople and children (AIHW 2003,2005), new books (Prior andRichardson 2005, Stanley et al 2005),or other examinations of researchquestions and priorities, such as thatbeing undertaken by the AustralianResearch Alliance for Children andYouth (Research Directions ReferenceGroup 2004). It also became clearerthat there were gaps in researchers’approach to and understanding of thetopic.

Drawing on the findings of thelongitudinal studies that were includedin this project, this document providesan overview of young people’swellbeing. The insights about youngpeople’s wellbeing that are generatedby these studies provide a point ofreference for a discussion of a broaderobjective that underlies this project:how social, economic and culturalchanges intersect with socio-economicand gender differences to producedifferent outcomes for different groupsin society and how young peoplerespond to social change and the waythey translate this complex process into

12

a narrative or life story, which isessential to enhancing their potentialand wellbeing.

The exploration of the ways in whichyoung people generate narratives oflife and create meaning within theirworlds raises the complex issue ofculture, values and spirituality. At thispoint the discussion paper movesbeyond the longitudinal studies into awider, more speculative synthesisabout cultural ‘intangibles’ which arehard to measure and so tend to beoverlooked or at least under-estimatedin research. Nonetheless, thesedimensions shape young people’spotential and affect wellbeing. Theirinclusion here is intended to contributeto a broadening of future research onyoung people and wellbeing.

The focus of the report is consistentwith the outcome of an earlier Delphisurvey on ‘realising human potential’that Australia 21 undertook in 2002.The survey was completed by about 25researchers and others from a range ofdisciplines, including psychology,sociology, epidemiology, economics,philosophy, education, futures studiesand history, and produced a ranked listof 36 research questions. The top tenquestions suggested a broadexamination of the nature of wellbeingand the transactions, interactions andbalances between individuals andsociety and its institutions that affectwellbeing. They also indicated aparticular focus on two areas:individual freedom and autonomy; andyoung people's wellbeing. The next 12questions supported this orientationand focus, while also introducingglobal and futures perspectives.

SynthesisThe report is an exercise ininterdisciplinary synthesis, inrecognition that discipline-based

empirical studies cannot capture thesubtlety of the effects of social changeon young people or the complexity oftheir responses. Synthesis raisesseveral important conceptual issues. Itstrives for coherence in the overallpicture rather than precision in thedetail; it dispenses with expectations ofscientific certainty and exactness,especially with respect to cause andeffect; everything is provisional, andrelationships are often reciprocal. Itpermits speculation - going beyond thedata – to enrich the picture.

Synthesis adds value to existingspecialised knowledge, generates newresearch questions, illuminatesdisciplinary biases andinterdisciplinary tensions, andenhances the application of knowledge.With respect to the last – application -synthesis can improve the fit betweenresearch and policy, and can strengthenthe links between research andadvocacy. It is particularly appropriatefor addressing the increasing scale andmagnitude of human problems, andsuits the complex, diffuse processes ofsocial change.

Synthesis provides a valuable meansfor identifying not only areas ofconvergence and synergy, but also‘flashpoints’ of tension or collisionbetween disciplinary assumptions andevidence. We (the authors) have notedseveral of these in this report, arisingout of the project discussions or thedrafting of the report (marked **).Disagreements can be productive asthey keep in focus different ways ofseeing. Relying on agreement, while itis sometimes necessary, and has itsown virtues, tends to iron out thedifferent ways of seeing and to presentthe picture as all too seamless. Bothconvergence and divergence provideroutes out of the confinement oftraditional boundaries. By compelling

13

researchers and others to thinkholistically, and positively, aboutyoung people’s potential andwellbeing, synthesis can foster bothhonesty about the limitations of theresearch and the evidence, andinnovation in overcoming theselimitations.

Overview

Opinions about the position of youngpeople (by which we mean adolescentsand young adults) in contemporarysociety range from the very optimisticto the deeply pessimistic. Is life foryoung people getting better or worse?The wide range of views reflects:highly fragmented and narrowdisciplinary research perspectives,which are usually based on a limitedevidence base (and sometimes noempirical evidence at all); anincomplete understanding of acomplex picture; and ideological,generational and other sources of biasand prejudice.

Health, broadly defined to includephysical, mental, social and spiritualwellbeing, provides a valid measure orbenchmark for assessing youngpeople’s situation. Taking a wide rangeof research evidence into account, itappears that:

• Young people are resilient, adaptingto changing social conditions,adjusting goals and expectations tosuit their times.

• Health, measured by life expectancyand mortality, continues to improve,mainly as a result of declines indeaths from road accidents andother injuries and, more recently,suicide and drugs (AIHW 2003,2005). Over 80 per cent of youngpeople say in surveys that they are

healthy, happy and satisfied withtheir lives.

• However, many young people arenot faring well. This is not a fixedgroup (Dwyer et al 2005). At onepoint or another, it seems that amajority will experience problems.

• The adverse trends in youngpeople’s health range acrossphysical problems such as obesityand inactivity to psychologicalproblems such as depression anddrug abuse, and from relativelyminor but common complaints suchas chronic tiredness to rare butserious problems such as suicide.

• A fifth to a third of young peopleare experiencing significantpsychological stress and distress atany one time, with some estimatesof the prevalence of a more generalmalaise reaching 50 per cent(Eckersley 2005a: 147-69). Youngpeople are experiencing higher ratesof mental health problems thanother age groups, and are retainingtheir increased risk beyond youthinto older age (Eckersley 2005a,ABS 1998, Kessler et al 2005a).

• Almost a third of young males and aquarter of young females (aged 12-24) are overweight or obese (AIHW2003). Inactivity has also increased.The changes place young people atrisk of a wide range of healthproblems later in life, includingdiabetes, heart disease and somecancers; there may also be effectson mental health, including throughthe stigmatisation of the obese.

In Australia and in other countriesresearchers have noted the apparentoptimism and wellbeing expressed byyoung people whose lives wouldappear, according to objective criteria,to be fairly negative (Evans 2002,Furlong and Cartmel 1997, Dwyer andWyn 2001). For example, the Life-

14

Patterns study found that, despite theobjective reality of a down-turn in theavailability of full-time jobs (eg. seeABS 2005), and the difficulty ofgaining places in tertiary education,young people largely remainedoptimistic about their personalsituation (Dwyer and Wyn 2001).

This corresponds with the commonfinding that ‘most young people areresilient’ and that they appear to adaptto changing social conditions. Thesebroad descriptions of young people’ssubjective assessments of their livesneed to be taken seriously, but theyalso need to be seen against a backdropof other data on wellbeing, including

that on psychological and socialproblems. We suggest that it isimportant to understand that all data onyoung people’s wellbeing are relevant,and that they tap into differentdimensions.

**1 How to measure wellbeing? Someresearchers and commentators usefindings on self-reported health andhappiness to argue that most youngpeople are doing well and that we need tofocus on the small minority who are not.Others say self-reports are only onedimension of any assessment, and shouldbe considered within the context of othermeasures of health and wellbeing.

Young Australians: most satisfied but half have a ‘problem’

The Australian Temperament Study has followed a large, representative group of Victorianchildren from infancy to age 19-20 in 2002. A new analysis of the latest data, stimulated by thisproject, illustrates the often sharp contrast between life satisfaction measures and otherwellbeing indicators. It showed that over 80 per cent of young people were satisfied with theirlives – including lifestyle, work or study, relationships with parents and friends,accomplishments and self-perceptions – but that 50 per cent were experiencing one or moreproblems associated with depression, anxiety, anti-social behaviour and alcohol use (Smartand Sanson 2005).

We believe both sets of findings need to be qualified, giving a better picture of young people’slives. The most troubled youth often drop out of such studies, and people also tend to givewhat they think are the ‘right’ answers. Responses to questions about happiness and lifesatisfaction are also biased by the nature of these qualities, especially that happiness andsatisfaction involve using various cognitive devices to maintain these states, whatever people’scircumstances. To some extent, people take their situation as a given, and assess theirwellbeing within that context.

On the other hand, ‘antisocial behaviour’ included illicit drug use in the past month, andproblem alcohol use was defined as binge drinking (7 or more drinks for males and 5 or morefor females) on five or more occasions in the past month. While these categories seemreasonable from a health perspective, many young people would not necessarily see this drugand alcohol use as a problem and could even consider it as part of enjoying life. Drug use canbe seen as an adaptive response to life’s pressures; it is also part of the ‘good life’ our culturepromotes.

15

Interpreting objective data is no lessdifficult. For example, the reversals insuicide and drug-related deaths withinthe past decade are cited as evidencethat ‘things are improving’. Yet thesedeclines do not necessarily mean animprovement in any underlying healthcondition. Hospitalisations of youngpeople for intentional self-harm andemotional and behavioural problemsincreased during the period that theyouth suicide rate fell (AIHW 2003).Psychological distress has alsoincreased among young men over thisperiod (Jorm and Butterworth 2006).This evidence suggests the explanationfor the fall in suicide is that moreyoung people are seeking and gettinghelp, not that fewer young people needhelp.

While Australia has good data ontrends in deaths over time, it lacksthese data for diseases, so the trendsare hard to establish. For example, in areview prepared for this project,Rosemary Aird and her colleagues(2004) concluded that, from anexamination of available mental healthdata, it was not possible to determinewhether there had been a long-termchange in the mental health andwellbeing of young people inAustralia.

Overseas studies tend to support theview that psychosocial problems havebecome more common in youngpeople in recent decades (Rutter andSmith 1995, Collishaw et al 2004),although the evidence is sometimescontradictory (Collishaw et al 2004,Hagell 2004). The latest US researchshows almost a half of Americans willexperience a clinical mental disorderduring their lives, while over a quarterwill suffer a disorder in any one year(Kessler et al 2005a, Kessler et al2005b). The lifetime risk increases forsuccessive generations: those aged 18

to 29 have a fourfold higher risk thanthose aged 60 and over.

Other research provides more indirectevidence of young people’s situation.This evidence includes publicperceptions of trends in quality of lifeand parents’ perceptions of the worldin which their children live, theimpacts of media, and the effects ofbroad cultural qualities such asmaterialism and individualism.

For example, a recent study reported ‘agrowing sense among parents thatchildhood is at risk because the dailyenvironment in which children live isperceived to be increasingly less safe,stable and predictable’ (Tucci et al2005). It found that 80 per cent ormore of parents believed children weregrowing up too fast; worried abouttheir children’s futures; and feltchildren were targeted too much bymarketers. Sixty per cent or moreworry about children’s exposurethrough the media to world events suchas terrorism, war and disasters;regulating what their children see ontelevision; and the potential for theirchildren to be exploited on the internet.It seems hardly surprising, then, thatmost lack confidence as parents, andwant more affirmation and support(Tucci et al 2004).

Views of young people are oftenframed in terms of differences:between the ill and the well, themarginalised and the mainstream, thedisadvantaged and the privileged,males and females. While discussingsome of these differences, we alsowant to explore the different layers ofperceptions and understanding ofyoung people and their world to assessthe ‘net effects’ of broad socialchanges.

16

The costs and benefits of social changeare not evenly distributed in the youthpopulation, nor are they confined toparticular groups. Costs are beingincurred across the social spectrum –from unemployed, poorly educatedyoung men who are being excludedfrom social participation, to privileged,well-educated young women who areexperiencing considerable stressbecause of high, and sometimesconflicting, expectations andaspirations. Indicators of health andwellbeing show that young indigenousAustralians have comparatively verypoor outcomes (AIHW 2003, 2005).

Thus changes that affect everyone can,nevertheless, affect people differentlyand contribute to specific problemsthat only some experience. Indemonstrating this, we want to drawattention, not so much to how youngpeople are coping with, or adapting to,these changes, but to how and underwhat conditions young people’swellbeing is maximised. 'Resilience'and 'the capacity to cope or adapt'imply an exposure to potentiallyadverse situations and circumstances.That most young people have thesequalities doesn't mean the effects ofsocial changes on human health andpotential can be ignored.

While individual problems may oftenbe explained in terms of a youngperson’s personal circumstances, thetrends in the rates of these problems ina population cannot. Furthermore,population-level effects cannotnecessarily be determined fromindividual-level studies. Thepopulation trends appear to reflectfundamental social, economic andcultural changes that have taken placein Australia and other nations in recentdecades.

The sources of psychosocial problemsin youth commonly include (Eckersley2005a: 147-69): genes andtemperament; developmentalsusceptibility; difficulties with family,friends, school, including conflict,abuse, neglect, failure; changes inadolescent transitions, including theemergence of a youth culture thatseparates young people from adults;socio-economic factors such aspoverty, disadvantage, inequality andunemployment; and cultural changesuch as media influences andincreasing materialism andindividualism.

However, not all of these factors arenecessarily implicated in the trendsover time in these problems. Forexample, studies typically show agradient in mental health problemswith socio-economic factors such asincome and family structure (that is,higher prevalence in lower-income andsingle-parent and blended families)(eg, Sawyer et al 2000). However, aUK study of 15-16-year-olds showedthese problems had risen between 1974and 1999 across all family types andsocial classes, suggesting changes inthese areas were not the main reasonsfor the rising trends (Collishaw et al2004, Hagell 2004).

Furthermore, recent American studiessuggest that children in affluentfamilies, although usually seen asbeing at lower risk, may in fact bemore likely than other children tosuffer substance use problems, anxietyand depression (Luthar 2003). Twofactors appear to be implicated:excessive pressures to achieve andisolation from parents (both physicaland emotional). The researchers saythat comparative studies of rich andpoor youth reveal ‘more similaritiesthan differences in their adjustment

17

patterns and socialisation processes’(Luthar and Latendresse 2005).

Australian data, such as they are, arecontradictory on this point, althoughmost measures of health show theusual socio-economic gradient. Evenwhere specific social factors areassociated with health problems, theyexplain only a small fraction ofindividual cases. In other words, evenwhere poverty, for example, is a riskfactor for these problems, most caseswill occur outside this group becauseonly a small proportion of thepopulation is poor. Such considerationsstrengthen the argument for payingmore attention to other possible causalfactors and processes, including howsocial factors interact with individuals'lives at a subjective as well asobjective level, in seeking tounderstand patterns and trends inwellbeing.

There was some discussion amongproject participants about whether itwas, in fact, possible or useful toattempt an overall assessment ofwhether life was getting better orworse for young people – that is, to tryto determine what the ‘net effects’have been of the social changes of thepast several decades. Certainly,outcomes have been mixed acrossmany dimensions of change. Forexample, while some dimensions ofgender inequality have been improved(for example, the participation ofwomen in education), others havecontinued to manifest unequaloutcomes (for example, the continuinggender gap in pay). Gains in humanrights sit alongside often dubiousimprovements in living conditions forsome marginalised groups. Toleranceof different cultures, identities andlifestyles has increased, but so,recently, have suspicion and fear of

other cultures and religions.However, we feel it is important toattempt a synthesis of a complexpicture, and this is reflected in thisoverview. The following sectionsexamine in more depth how some ofthe social changes of recent decadeshave shaped young people’s potentialand wellbeing, and how theseresponses, in turn, shape socialchanges.

**2 Life for young people - getting better orworse? Some project participantsquestioned the value of this questionbecause such a broad assessment is notnecessary and the evidence is incomplete,contradictory and inconclusive. Othersargue the question provides a point ofreference for considering the ‘big picture’of the impact of broader social changes onyoung people’s health and wellbeing, andalso encourages a closer scrutiny of thetotality of the evidence.

Another, related question raised in theworkshops was whether it was possibleto separate potential from wellbeing,and have, for example, betterrealisation of potential but decliningwellbeing. Most felt this was unlikely,and that the two qualities were tiedtogether. In psychology ‘subjectivewellbeing’ is often equated withhappiness, but is more accuratelydefined as a people's positiveevaluation of their lives and includespositive emotion, engagement,satisfaction and meaning, thusimplying a link with potential (Dienerand Seligman 2004). The link withpotential is closer in the concept of‘eudaimonic wellbeing’, which focuseson meaning and self-realisation ratherthan happiness; wellbeing consists offulfilling one’s daimon or true nature,of being ‘fully functioning’ (Eckersley2005a: 96-97). Daimon is an ideal ofexcellence, of striving towards a

18

perfection, which gives meaning anddirection to one’s life, and isdistinguished from simply achievingpleasure.

There is also a sociological literaturethat focuses on wellbeing in terms ofthe quality of the social relationshipswithin societies, communities orgroups, rather than seeing wellbeing asa quality that is possessed byindividuals (Wyn and White 2004).One of the sociological links betweenwellbeing and potential is expressed inthe concept of ‘social capital’, in which‘enabling’ social structures create thepossibilities for individuals and groupsto thrive. Thus the sociologicalliterature also implies a closerelationship between potential andwellbeing.

It could be argued that, to some extentat least, better education, greater social(ethnic and gender) equality andgreater material prosperity haveimproved the potential of many groupsof young people. However, at the sametime, there is evidence that in someareas of life wellbeing has not beenenhanced, and has even declined.Research on young people’s lives

reveals the emergence of priorities andpatterns of living that are differentfrom the previous generation. Theprocess of ‘individualization’ hascreated new forms of social divisionbetween groups (the haves and thehave-nots in new global economies),new forms of engagement (e.g.consumption), and new ways ofrelating (more independently) thathave significant implications for bothwellbeing and potential. Thefollowing sections explore the extent towhich these shifts represent a re-definition of wellbeing by individualsand the impact of social change onyoung people’s potential.

**3 Potential and/or wellbeing? The projectraised the question of whether potentialand wellbeing could be distinguished andthe trends in each move in oppositedirections. It may be that freeing andequipping people to realise their fullpotential entails risks to wellbeing becauseof the increased risk of failure. How termssuch as wellbeing and happiness aredefined or understood is relevant to thisissue. This question was not considered indetail and we feel it warrants furtherdiscussion.

19

Wellbeing: more than feeling good

We often measure wellbeing as happiness or satisfaction with life (Eckersley 2005b). The searchfor happiness is often confused with the pursuit of pleasure, but wellbeing is about more thanliving 'the good life'; it is about having meaning in life, about fulfilling our potential and feelingthat our lives are worthwhile.

Our wellbeing is shaped by our genes, our personal circumstances and choices, the socialconditions in which we live, and the complex ways in which all these things interact. Theevidence shows that a close family, the company of friends, rewarding work, sufficient money,a good diet, physical activity, sound sleep, engaging leisure and spiritual belief and practice allenhance our wellbeing. Optimism, trust, self-worth and autonomy make us happier. Gratitudeand kindness lift our spirits; indeed, giving support can be at least as beneficial as receiving it.Having clear goals that we can work towards, a 'sense of place' and belonging, a coherent andpositive view of the world, and the belief that we are part of something bigger than ourselvesfoster wellbeing.

Wellbeing is powerfully influenced by perceptions and expectations. Adaptation and socialcomparison are especially important. We tend to adapt to changes in our situation, whetherit's gaining something or losing it. Our position relative to others counts; comparing favourablyelevates us, comparing poorly diminishes us. The gap between our aspirations andachievements also matters.

Associations between social factors and wellbeing are often, if not always, reciprocal: happierpeople are more likely to have partners, have more friends, do more interesting work, or earnhigher incomes. Many of the factors are interrelated: the costs of being unemployed go wellbeyond the loss of income; work also offers purpose in life, belonging and friendship. Onesource of wellbeing can compensate, at least partly, for the lack of another: having a partnerdoes most for people who lack friends and other social connections; those who are single,elderly or in poor health gain most from religion.

All in all, wellbeing comes from being connected and engaged, from being suspended in aweb of relationships and interests. These give meaning to our lives. The intimacy, belongingand support provided by close personal relationships seem to matter most; and isolationexacts the highest price.

Socio-economics, genderand history

The researchers who participated inthis project are practiced in defining,refining and deepening knowledgeabout young people’s wellbeing, healthand outcomes within their own area ofexpertise. At the same time, all arewell aware that each ‘area’ of expertiseis only able to tell part of the story. Aspointed out in the previous section, the

available data on the key aspects ofyoung people’s lives describes acomplex situation for youngAustralians.

While there are increased opportunitiescompared with a generation ago (forexample, in education, employmentand life-style) the evidence reveals thatthe expected benefits in terms of healthand wellbeing are not equally sharedacross all groups of young people. Asteady stream of evidence shows that

20

the conditions of post-industrialsociety in Australia may pose a threatto young people’s wellbeing.

The challenge for the participants wasto go beyond the recognition that theeffect of social change on youngAustralians’ lives is ‘complex’ and toanalyse its dimensions. In order to dothis, insights and evidence generatedfrom different fields and disciplinesthrough longitudinal research havebeen brought to bear. Working alongthe ‘fault lines’ of the differentdisciplines, the project has worked atdeepening and extending theintersections to interweave insightsabout young people’s health andwellbeing from the fields of history,sociology, cultural studies, andepidemiology.

A historical perspectiveThe perspective provided byMcCalman (2004) has formed ahistorical underpinning for the project .Her research on Australians duringdramatic periods of change (forexample, 1857 – 1900; 1920s – 1930s)illustrates the social effects ofuncertainty and of poverty on people’slives. Drawing on a data set of birthrecords of Melbourne’s RoyalWomen’s Hospital of 3335 charitybabies born between 1857 and 1900,she describes the life chances of poorwhite Australians in the twentiethcentury.

She found that poor men withuncertain job prospects were the leastlikely to form families and that low-skilled men rarely lived long. Thosewho did form families had the greatestlongevity. Childhood deprivation(which she describes as physical,emotional and intellectual) isassociated with higher risk of coronaryheart disease. Prolongedunemployment, especially in early

adulthood, has a negative impact onhealth and capacity to form stablefamilies. McCalman sees strong linksbetween the social conditions ofuncertainty of past generations andtoday’s situation in which ‘thefragmented, short-term, constantlychanging work experience of post-industrial youth is exacting a tollalready in postponed marriage andchildbearing, which for many willbecome foregone in the next decade’(McCalman 2004).

The Life-Patterns ProjectMcCalman’s historical perspectivehighlights the relationship betweeneconomic conditions and socialrelations. Her underlying question –how do people construct a life in theirtimes? - is also the driving question fortwo contemporary research projects:the Life-Patterns project of theAustralian Youth Research Centre andWierenga’s Making a Life project. TheLife-Patterns project, an explanatorylongitudinal cohort study has generatedinsights into the lives of youngAustralians in the ‘post-1970generation’. It describes the ways inwhich young people who leftsecondary school in the year 1991 havecoped with change and uncertainty.

Taking a sociological approach, thisstudy has highlighted the need forsocial researchers to acknowledge bothgenerational change (i.e. the ‘lifecourse’) and social change (the contextof social, political and economicconditions). The analysis of theexperiences and perceptions of theseyoung people from the age of 24 to 31has produced the concept of a ‘newadulthood’, shaped by this generation.It is argued that the social conditionsprevailing for the post-1970 generationhave precluded access to the adulthoodthat was available to generations thatcame of age between 1950 and 1969.

21

A Historian’s view of post-industrial youth

One of the paradoxes of our times is that Australian young people are better educated,healthier and wealthier than ever before in history, yet they perceive themselves to be a lessfortunate generation. There seems to be a contradiction between the affluence that hassupported their years of growing and their newly learnt experience that in their own turn, theymay be unable to match their parents’ personal equity and security. Their advantages derivefrom the good fortune of their parents, and even if their parents’ equity is to become theirs intime by inheritance, it will not go far in supporting the next generation. They are very awarethat their future comfort and security depends not on the past, but what they can make in thefuture.

It is before living memory now, but it is still not that long ago that a significant proportion ofthe poor were trapped for life in the casual labour markets. That indeed was a major reason fortheir poverty, and for the apparently self-destructive behaviour that appalled moralists – theheavy drinking, the gambling, the violence, the petty crime. The Australian economy remaineddependent on casual employment in agriculture, building, infrastructure construction and thewharves until after World War II. There was a chronic shortage of work for men and womenwho had only their bodily strength and manual dexterity to sell on the labour market. Thegolden age of employment after the second world war has been an historic anomaly. Theeffect of the new stability in working-class incomes was felt most by their families and wasdemonstrated in the fact that they even started families.

Despite the great disparity in life chances between the educated and the unskilled in the earlytwenty-first century, they share a common generational plight where the generations ahead ofthem need high property values to sustain their own equity and long-term security. Thismeans that many young people will never own a home and will continue to carry debts fromtheir education, so that they cannot afford to retrain, and they will face early parenthood withfewer services. To compound their difficulties, they cannot raise and house a family withouttwo incomes, but they are denied adequate childcare. The jobs the young can find are toooften as members of the new digital proletariat where they have no future, no superannuation,no sick pay and no long service leave. As some of the old poor told Peel (2003): they feel fortheir grandchildren who were born into hope and who must again learn how to be poor ifthey are to survive.

From a contribution to the project by Janet McCalman, 2004

There are many factors that haveimpacted on this generation, includingthe widespread use of new informationtechnologies, and the (related)expansion of economic deregulation(or globalisation). However, twofactors are seen to specifically affectthe post-1970 generation: a) they werethe first generation of Australians forwhom completion of secondaryeducation and the engagement withpost-compulsory education became thenorm and b) they entered a flexible,

unstable labour market in whichcasual, part-time and short-termemployment was the norm (Dwyer andWyn 2001).

For these young people, one of themost significant effects has beenuncertainty. Although educationalcredentials have become increasinglyimportant for employment, the linkbetween the two is relatively indirect.Employment conditions are alsorelatively unpredictable. Uncertainty

22

about which educational pathway totake and about longer-termemployment prospects has created ageneration for whom flexibility is moreimportant than predictability as ameans of security.

They are a generation for whom thecapacity to make choices is paramount.They need to hold on to multipleoptions in work and study and theytake responsibility (and blame) fortheir own personal development andwellbeing. Dwyer and Wyn (2001)

argue that, in response to theconditions they find, this generationhas forged a ‘new adulthood’ in whichthe timelines for key life events thatwere taken for granted by the previousgeneration have been altered.

Elements of the ‘new adulthood’resonate with the lives of earliergenerations, as described byMcCalman. The effects of uncertainty,on a wide scale, have been noted inboth McCalman’s historical work andin the Life-Patterns study.

Some gender and class outcomes from the Life-Patterns study

Socio-economic status and gender differences highlight the need to understand the ways inwhich individuals negotiate and shape social change. For example, young women from thehigher socio-economic (SE) backgrounds are more likely than any other group to report that ithas been ‘hard’ to achieve what they have and their male counterparts are the most likely ofany group to report that it has been easy. By contrast, males from low SE backgrounds reportthat it has been ‘hard’ to achieve what they have and their female counterparts report that ithas been easier. Young women from high SE backgrounds were far more likely to report that itwas ‘harder for them than for their parents.’

However, objectively, SE background produces very different results. Although young womenfrom high SE backgrounds report that subjectively things have been difficult or ‘hard’, they arefar more likely than women from low SE backgrounds to be in a professional occupation. Theclass effect for males is almost negligible.

Across all dimensions of their lives, health continues to be the greatest source of concern to allgroups. Young men from low SE backgrounds are the most likely to report that their health is aconcern (only 10 per cent are ‘very satisfied’ with their health), and men from high SEbackgrounds are more likely than any other group to report that their health is less a concern(29 per cent are ‘very satisfied’ with their health).

Equally low numbers of young women in both low and high SE background groups (17 percent) report that they are ‘very satisfied’ with their health. The Life-Patterns researchdemonstrates the effects of class and gender on satisfaction with life. It provides a morecomplex analysis of the effects of social change on young people’s life patterns and healththan is often available through the analysis of broad population statistics.

23

Other researchLike the research conducted byMcCalman, the implication drawnfrom the Life-Patterns study is thatwellbeing is a function of broadersocial conditions (for example,‘uncertainty’, job insecurity) and ofclass and gender. This argument isgiven a sharper focus by researchersfrom the Mater-University Study ofPregnancy (MUSP), a prospectivelongitudinal study of maternal andchild health. MUSP researchers foundthat maternal smoking in earlypregnancy was a much strongerpredictor of behaviour problems inchildhood than maternal smokingwhen the child was 5 years of age(Williams, O’Callaghan, Najman et al1998). Interestingly, the socio-economic status of a child’sgrandparent was found to be a strongerpredictor of adolescent cognitivedevelopment than the socio-economicstatus of the child’s parents (Najman,Aird, Bor et al 2004).

It would appear that the relationshipbetween socio-economic status andwellbeing would warrant further studybecause while the relationship iscommonly acknowledged, its nature isnot clear. Aird and her colleagues(2004) are cautious about drawingconclusions about trends in the healthof young Australians over time, andthe causes of these trends. In commonwith other researchers employinglongitudinal approaches to research,they point out that longitudinal studiesare prone to methodologicalshortcomings. These includedifficulties of making comparisonsacross data bases that do not shareuniform methodologies and biasthrough over-reporting by some groupsand through sample attrition.

A further caution relates to theinterpretation of data. It is important

that the complexity underlying broadpatterns is acknowledged, and that theinterpretation of trends is notsimplistic. This point was emphasisedby McLeod, drawing upon a study ofyoung people’s transitions throughschool (The 12 to 18 project, Yates andMcLeod 1993-2001). The studypointed to the multi-layered andsometimes double-edged effects ofgender and class relations. Forinstance, much research now showsthat many young women, andparticularly middle-class youngwomen, are feeling under increasingpressure to perform well academically,to work hard, to plan for a successfulworking life and to juggle manycommitments. On the one hand, thiscan be interpreted as a threat towellbeing because of the associatedhigh levels of stress and anxiety. Onthe other hand, the sense of satisfactionand even pleasure that such youngwomen may simultaneously derivefrom such hard work should not bediscounted.

The research of McLeod and Yatesalso highlights that, at the same timethat young people are living in anincreasingly ‘individualised’ world andcoping with choice, there is adiscernable process of ‘re-traditionalisation’ along both class andgender lines. In other words,individuals are not free to inventthemselves totally, and new forms ofgender and class inequality can bemasked by apparent change. Forexample, while the pattern for youngwomen to have higher levels ofeducational participation than theirmale peers, their educational success isnot translated into occupationalsuccess. Women continue to beemployed in a narrow range ofoccupations and a gap of 8 per centexists between male and femaleearnings (ABS, 2005). This pattern for

24

the apparent reduction in genderinequality (the educational success ofgirls) is overlaid by the enduringnature of traditional gender inequalitiesin the workplace (re-traditionalisation).

The complexity of understanding howyoung people make a life in the contextof uncertainty and change is also notedby the Women’s Health AustraliaStudy (Lee 2001, Eckersley 2005a:164). It found that young women (aged18-23) reported higher levels of stressthan middle-aged and older women,were often tired, and were over-concerned with their weight and bodyshape. The young women scoredhighest of the three groups on thephysical-health measures, but thelowest on the mental-health scales.

Dobson (in Eckersley 2005a:155-164)says of the study that young womenreported even higher levels of stresswhen they were surveyed a secondtime, when aged 22 – 27. ‘They arestressed about money, employment andwork. Their expectations are high andso are their aspirations – for moreeducation, full-time employment, astable relationship, and two or morechildren by the time they are thirty-five…they feel more pressured andrushed than previous generations.’

Other researchers also emphasise thedouble-edged effects of social change,and the conditions under which youngpeople are shaping their lives. Forexample, Harris (2004), echoing thepoint made by McCalman, observesthat young people’s ‘enthusiasm forthe aspects of life that bring joy,creativity, and connectedness’ seems tobe incongruous against the ‘facts’ –high levels of unemployment for somegroups of youth, part-time

employment, the gradualdisappearance of the welfare safety netand expanded policy surveillance forthose who do rely on welfare support.She expresses deep concern about thefailure of policies and social structuresto support young people, and notes theincongruity of the lack of support andthe increasing expectations of youngpeople (for example, to extend theireducational credentials, pay increasingfees for education and health care andadapt to economic and labour marketuncertainty).

Other longitudinal research addsfurther complexity to the assumedrelationship between social conditionsand wellbeing. The Australian Councilfor Educational Research study ofAustralian youth undertaken by Marksand Fleming for example, comparesthe changing transition patterns forcohorts of young Australians (Marksand Fleming 1999). This study of theinfluences and consequences ofwellbeing amongst Australian youth(1980 to 1995) draws the conclusionthat wellbeing is in itself a factorcontributing to the likelihood ofemployment and to level ofremuneration. To put this another way,they argue that wellbeing has‘sociological implications’.

Notwithstanding the kinds ofmethodological and interpretiveproblems and cautions that have beenidentified, the process of synthesisingthe findings of these longitudinalstudies has revealed remarkablycommon themes. In summary:

• Wellbeing is both a ‘cause’ and‘effect’: that is, it appears to besignificantly related to underlyingsocial conditions and, at the sametime, to be an important element increating positive outcomes forindividuals.

25

• Contemporary social change hascreated conditions of ‘uncertainty’which have an uneven impact onsocial groups.

In the next section we attempt todeepen our understanding of the broadand complex patterns identified by theparticipants in this project by focusingon an in-depth longitudinal study ofhow one group of young people haveresponded to the challenges in theirlives. The study by Wierenga is ourfocus because the level of detail aboutindividual decisions and experiencesand the extensive recourse to youngpeople’s own words and storiesprovide a medium through which theinsights from other studies can besynthesised.

Two worlds

The studies mentioned in this reporthave pointed to this generations’increased need to negotiate uncertaintyand make choices. This section of thereport, will explore the need tonegotiate complex, changing andunknown territory. How, in thiscontext, are young people managing tonegotiate their lives? In terms ofcontext, what assists them to do this?On the basis of research withAustralian young people, is it possibleto make some statements about thesocial conditions that help and hinderthem to do so? Lots of young peoplefall down but what helps them to standup again? Might it be possible, throughthese lenses, to highlight processes thatwould contribute to young people’ssuccess and wellbeing?

One way into exploring this terrain isto listen closely to young people’s ownaccounts of how they are negotiatingtheir lives in different social contexts.Several Australian studies bring us thiskind of fine-grained data (eg, Dwyer

and Wyn 2001, McLeod and Yates2000, Woodman 2004). Thesequalitative studies aim to generatetheoretical and conceptualunderstandings. Qualitative researchmakes no claim of generalisability topopulations on the basis of statisticalcalculations. Instead, the claim forrelevance is on the basis of embeddingconceptual advances in empiricalresearch (Denzin 1978).

Some of these qualitative, exploratorystudies assist us to focus in on youngpeople’s own observations about howthey are doing, what helps, and whatgets in the way. One example of alongitudinal study that has specificallyexplored this territory is the Making aLife project (Wierenga 1999, 2001,2002). The study focused on a group of32 rural young people as they grew up.Of particular concern to teachers,parents and professionals in theircommunity were the issues of youngpeople reaching their potential,particularly under conditions ofdramatic local and global social changeand rural decline. Interviews wereconducted with young people everytwo years, from high school (year 8) toadulthood. The focus for the study wason the ways in which the young peoplein the cohort established meaning,livelihood and connectedness.

Over time, these young people’s livesand paths fanned out, in terms ofsuccess and wellbeing. They had arange of different circumstances. Overtime, many fell down, some got backup. What were the factors underlyingthis difference? Undoubtedly therewere many (eg, biological, genetic,class, gender etc). Wierenga notes thatone thing which consistently mademost significant difference is theindividual’s capacity to make sense ofthe things that she or he was facing anddoing. In a context of constant change,

26

it was important to have some sense ofpersonal ‘agency’ - control or capacityto negotiate willfully the things thatthey were facing. In this study, themost powerful way that this agencywas revealed was through theirpractices of ‘storying’.

Story and practices of ‘storying’The Making a Life study offers aconceptual framework and someinsights that might be drawn out herefor more general purposes.Particularly, it highlights the differentways in which these young people usestories and practices of ‘storying’ inorder to (with differing degrees ofsuccess) negotiate a complex socialworld.

In this study Wierenga points out thelinks between understanding andagency – the association betweenclarity of story and clarity of action.When asked about their futures, someyoung people would tell ‘clear stories’.For example one might talk aboutloving the valley they lived in, and saythat they intended to stay close tofamily. Another might talk aboutwanting to become a teacher andleaving the valley. Other young peoplemight tell ‘unclear stories’: forexample not saying what they wantedto do, where they wanted to go, why orhow. These also tended to be the oneswho were, at the time of finishing year10, least prepared for their futures. Astime went on, those who did not shareclear stories were least able to becreative with the changingcircumstances in which they foundthemselves.

Over time other research has exploredhow personal stories or narratives canbe useful for negotiating complexsocial spaces. For example, for 40years, social theorists have exploredhow individuals make meaning and

construct identities in story (eg, seeStrauss 1977). Moral philosophershave suggested that individuals' storiesare narratives of progress, charting thejourney towards and away from 'thegood' or valued goal-states (eg, Taylor1989). A body of work has emergedaround narrative, exploring theincreased importance of story in themultiple and changing ways in whichpeople make sense of their lives andidentities in a now complex andchanging world (eg, see Bruner 1987,Gergen and Gergen 1988).

These observations about thesignificance of story also convergewith the findings of other Australianstudies of young people. For exampleresearchers on career education notethat, amidst increasingly complexoptions and pathways, personalnarratives or stories have becomenecessary not only for individuals tonegotiate the options, but also tounderstand why and how they mighteven engage with their education (eg,Patton 2001).

The Making a Life study revealedsignificant differences in the life-courses of those who were able to bepro-active versus those who were‘doing something else’. ‘Somethingelse’ seemed often to be about basicsurvival. Clear stories correlated tothemes of hope. Unclear stories oftenreflected fear. Clear stories wouldarticulate ‘best options for me’: forexample an individual might want tobecome a teacher because they thinkthey might enjoy it and have the skillsto do it. Unclear stories would oftenreflect ‘least worst’ options: forexample wanting to live ‘anywhere buthere’. Over time those who wereengaging with ‘best options for me’were in a much stronger position.Practices of engagement and planninglead to opportunities, new networks,

27

new opportunities, and so on.Withdrawal or avoidance is protective,but tends to lead to the opposite.

Beyond particular stories or narratives,Wierenga notes the significance of‘storying’. Over time, circumstanceschange, and many young people do notend up following the courses of actionthat they thought they might. However,it is the practice of storying, of actionand reflection, rather than the detail ofthe stories themselves, that seems todemarcate those who have some senseof control over their destiny. Havingthis capacity is like being captain oftheir craft rather than being ‘at themercy of social forces, blown about bywind and tide.’ (Wierenga 1999:198)

The study revealed that the capacity tohold strong personal narratives alsoallow young people to negotiate chaos,hardship and crisis. Evidence from avariety of other sources suggests thatstories are increasingly recognised asuseful to this end (eg, Frankl 1984).More recently, narrative therapistshave explored the process of 're-storying' shattered lives (White andEpston 1990, White 1995).

This work also highlights the notion of‘thick’ and ‘thin’ stories (Geertz 1973).Applied in this setting ‘thick’ storiesinvolve multiple layers of possibilityabout ‘who I am’ / ‘who we are’ and‘what I could do’ / ‘what we could do’.In a complex world, those withmultiple contingencies (or availablestorylines) are in a relatively strongposition. The breadth of storylinesequates to robustness, particularlywhen circumstances change. Narrativetherapists have also picked up thisdynamic, revealing how ‘richlydescribed lives’ equate to robustness ata time of crisis (White 1997).

Two worlds, and the space in betweenIt is well and good to talk about theparticular practices of individuals, butwhat can this tell us about theassociated conditions that fosterwellbeing in young people? Whatsocial conditions foster activenegotiations, clear stories of identity orrichly described lives? What socialconditions can be linked back torobustness in the face of change orpotential crisis?

Addressing these questions requires anexploration of the interaction betweensociety and the individual, socialstructure and individual agency, theexternal conditions and individualinterpretations, the objective andsubjective worlds – in summary,exploring two worlds and the space inbetween. It appears that this storyingdynamic reaches well beyond thesubjective world. Firstly, (as above) itis about action. If something is definedas real, it becomes real in itsconsequences (even if only to a limitedextent).

Other research (eg, McLeod and Yates2000) has looked more to points ofconnection between social processesand subjectivity, investigating howbiographies are formed in interactionwith particular social and institutionallocations. Personal stories, then, areunderstood as not only therepresentation of unique lives but asalso in part social conversations andstorylines that arise out of specificsocial experiences and settings. In thisway, the shared storylines shed light onmore than the subjective world. Theytake us to the space in between.Meanwhile other work (eg, Putnam2003) emphasises the importance ofpersonal stories to individual andcollective action.

.

28

Futures, decision making and the self: observations from the 12-18 Study

Young people's future thinking combines ideas about 'destinations' (what sort of job I wouldlike?) and desires about being and becoming a certain type of person (who am I and who do Iwant to become?) (McLeod and Yates, in press). These ways of thinking about the future areinter-related. Yet in research and in policy discussions about young people's futures,'daydreams' and 'pathways' tend to occupy different worlds.

The language of 'pathways' and destinations is more likely to be part of concerns aboutvocational directions, labour market options, tracking cohorts, studying transitions andanalysing institutional structures and supports. Attention to 'daydreaming' and 'dreams' isassociated with a more interpretive focus on subjective meanings. However, the key point isthat if we are to deepen our understandings of young people’s pathways and wellbeing, thenwe need to investigate both.

In the plethora of findings on pathways and transition patterns, we still do not know enoughabout the decision-making and motivations of young people. One way into this could bethrough the stories they tell themselves and others about they kind of person they’d like to beor become. In other words, future thinking is linked to more than career plans. It is powerfullylinked to imagining the kind of person you might like to become. There are connections hereto young people's sense of self (who am I?) and associated questions of 'wellbeing'.

From a contribution to the project by Julie McLeod, 2005

Other new research (Woodman 2004)points to the idea that whilst it isimportant for young people to beactive negotiators of their own lives,for the sake of their own wellbeingthey also see the need to claim ‘timeout’ from all the negotiating andplanning.

From the Making a Life study,Wierenga suggests that beyond beingpersonal resources, young people’sstories tell us about the social world inwhich they live. Individuals aredifferently making their lives, based onaccess to different resources. Theseresources could be things that arepractical and concrete (housing, lifts toplaces, job opportunities), or moreintangible and cultural (for example

different kinds of ideas, storylines ofhow things could be, particular habits).Young people’s stories about theirlives can be understood as maps ofresource flows (Wierenga 2001). Theyreveal the different resources they canaccess, and the significance of therelationships through which they aredoing so. Access to any resourcehappens only through trustrelationships. There is a differencebetween things that are made availableto the public, and things that actuallybecome accessible to particularindividuals and groups. That is,resources can be made available toyoung people but they do not becomeaccessible to them – in terms ofincorporation in life-story - unless theyare mediated through relationships oftrust.

29

The meaning of wellbeing to young people

In a study of young people aged 16 and 17, Woodman (2004) found that two strong themesemerged in the way young people speak about wellbeing. Firstly, young people feelresponsibility for their future outcomes, keeping their options open, and managing their ownlives. Secondly, in this context, time for ‘present-centred’ activity, activity focused onengagement with the ‘here and now’, away from responsibility is also important for wellbeing.Wellbeing for young people involves balancing these two aspects of their lives.

Achieving this balance can be difficult, in the face of the need to negotiate an uncertain andchanging social world, and the expectations of schools and parents. To a certain extent youngpeople themselves reinforce the idea that being successful and ‘well’ means takingresponsibility for your own life and keeping options open. However, this puts young peopleunder considerable pressure and takes a great deal of time. The young people interviewed feltthat they did not have enough time for the other less-cognitive and present-centred aspectsof wellbeing that they also value and, ironically, help them cope with taking responsibly.

Work on young people’s coping strategies generally interprets problem avoidance approaches(as many present-centred, less cognitive behaviours are often labelled) as less effective andmore problematic than cognitive problem solving strategies. However, Woodman’s researchindicates that these present-centred activities are significant coping mechanisms for youngpeople, who feel almost completely responsible for their own futures. While not ruling out theinfluence of other factors such as marketing or availability, or denying that for some youngpeople alcohol and drugs become a serious issue, these research findings suggest that drugs,alcohol use, and driving cars or time at the local mall with friends can be part of bracketing outsome time in the present moment away from the burden of the future.

From a contribution to the project by Dan Woodman, 2005

So, for example, where teachers arenot trusted, the information they sharewith students may even be learned,able to be parroted back, but it is lesslikely to be incorporated into youngpeople’s stories about their own lives.Likewise, they may be aware of ahealth service; but unless it involves aperson they trust, or they areintroduced by a person they trust, theywill be less willing to use it. Wierengahighlights the role of subjectiveunderstandings. Young people’sdifferent cultural definitions of ‘peoplelike me, ‘who I am’, ‘who we are’,‘them and us’ become significantfilters of ideas and information.Wierenga notes the same happening

with practical resources (eg, housing,hobby choices, job opportunities).

Trust can be vicarious (it is caughtrather than taught) but it is contingentupon the available storylines aboutwho can be trusted. So where familiesdo not trust education providers, andwhere their own local networks areeroded by social change, when theynegotiate their children’s futures, theyare largely on their own. This is anincreasingly frightening place to be.Understood in this context, youngpeople’s success and wellbeing is notjust a function of the resourcesavailable to them through their ownnetworks, but also in their network’snetworks.

30

If this set of findings applies morewidely, it has significant implicationsfor policy. These points becomeparticularly significant if we areembarking on a discussion aboutshaping social context to be livable,not simply shaping lives to fit orwithstand the conditions. This materialfocuses the central issues for successand wellbeing towards young people’saccess to the resources that theyrequire. It focuses the main solutions(and challenges) around establishingand maintaining relationships of trust.This seems to go against the grain ofmany of the trends that appear incontemporary society, for exampleincreased mobility and economicrationalisation.

The points raised above also echosome key findings about Australianyoung people by Connell et al (1982)in a classic longitudinal study ofdifferent life chances, opportunitiesand constraints. They suggest thatsocial inequalities can most usefully beunderstood not as different categoriesof people, but as what people do, andare able to do with resources andrelationships. This could soundindividualistic, but if it is understoodin the context of networks, differentsets of trust relationships, and the verydifferent flows of resources throughsociety, it makes far more sense.Again, trust relationships set thecontext for individuals' different life-chances.

The findings also echo other morecontemporary work, for examplePutnam (2003), who argues that trustrelationships lay the foundation for anyform of social exchange. Putnam alsoargues that contemporary socialconditions are increasingly hostile tothe webs of trust relationships thatsupport people to make a life. One ofthe arguments raised by the Making a

Life study is that young people onlydraw help from trusted sources. Attimes of crisis help is only accessedthrough relationships already in place.This seems to be backed up byAustralian research on help-seekingpractices in young people (eg, Cahill etal 2004).

Individual and shared storiesFor the purposes of this report,Wierenga’s insights might also belocated in a still broader context. In theface of social change, weavingstorylines through chaos, change andcomplexity becomes a significant taskfor young people, but also for groupsand communities. It also becomessignificant task for researchers andpolicy makers.

Literature from anthropology,sociology, moral philosophy andeducation has highlighted thesignificance of stories, for individualsconstructing their own lives (asexplored above), but also for ongoingcommunity life. At the level ofcommunity, anthropologists havecharted how the central ideas ofcommunities are carried betweengenerations in the stories that they tell,and that story is a powerful vehicle fortransporting ideas over both time andspace (Levi-Strauss 1979). Out of thefield of education comes the realisationthat the kinds of stories people tellactually shape history (eg, see Freire1973). How people tell a story willshape how they act, so what getsselected as being important, and how itis told, is inherently political.

This raises questions about the sourcematerial from which young people candraw, about the cultural storylinesavailable to, and about young people –for example, spiritual beliefs, sharedunderstandings about the world'sfuture.

31

The ideas about needing to createrobustness through change throughmultiple storylines and thick storiesalso raise some interesting questionsabout the role of the mass media asstorytellers. Access to a particular kindof dominant storyline appears to behaving widespread impacts on healthand wellbeing, including throughsocial unease and conflict (eg, thedefining stories behind terrorism andthe war against it).

Wierenga notes that in the Making aLife study cohort, some individualsappear to live in a state of crisis. Oneof the features of these stories isfragmentation. This is revealed as lackof pro-activity, focus is close andimmediate, obstacles are met with asimple pain avoidance pattern, ratherthan a long term focus on what mightbe best. Particularly when survival isparamount, it seems that energy is notavailable or being utilised for thebigger picture, reflection, andplanning.

One observation is that this also mighthappen for people, at a collective level,in the ways they culturally andorganisationally face social change.Social and economic factors (eg, workand time pressures) can have the effectof making stories individualised,fragmented and incoherent. Individualand corporate focus can remain small,limited to the solution of immediateproblems. Those working with youngpeople often talk about having limitedspaces for personal and sharedreflection (Wierenga et al 2003). Thenext section of this report will exploresome of these themes relating toculture and policy in more depth.Having claimed a shared space, andhaving asked some of the ‘bigger’questions, it seems important to do so.

Cultures, values, futuresand spirit

The previous section of this report hashighlighted the significance of youngpeople’s narratives and the social,cultural and material resources thatthey call on to ‘make a life’ – well.This section takes up subjective andcultural areas of life that are oftenintangible, and rarely addressed inresearch on wellbeing and humanpotential. We have developed thissection in order to place these issues onfuture research agendas. They includepopular notions of success andwellbeing; materialism andindividualism; the role of values;future visions and social cohesion; andthe importance of cultural expressionsof spirituality, including ritual.

Cultures provide many of the resourcesyoung people need to construct thepersonal narratives that are crucial tomaking their way in life and relating tothe world around them - and so to theirwellbeing. Australia shares broadcultural qualities with other modernWestern societies. But it alsocomprises many subcultures markedby sometimes very different values,meanings and beliefs. Because offactors such as location, gender, classand ethnicity, young people will haveaccess to different cultural resources,or different storylines about what isimportant and who they can be.Individuals absorb cultural influences,but also interact actively with them;they are also creators of culture. Theimportant point here is that youngpeople will make their lives with thecultural resources (ideas, storylines)that are available.

32

**4 Social influences or individuals’ owncapacities? This issue focuses on the extentto which the social and economicenvironment (for example the increasedopportunities for commercial influences tointrude into young people’s lives throughnew media forms) can be said to affectwellbeing, regardless of young people’scapacities to interpret, critique, subvertand resist these influences.

The extent to which young people arevulnerable or at risk within the processof social change is also addressedthrough a renewed interest in thedevelopmental perspective. Youthcommentators have begun to draw onresearch (Dittman 2004) that suggest

that young people’s neurologicaldevelopment makes them moresusceptible than older people toparticular problems. Psychologistshave argued that children arecognitively less equipped than adults tounderstand the intent behind culturalmessages. Recent research suggeststhat children aged eight or less lack thecognitive ability to recognizeadvertising's persuasive purpose, andso believe its claims are true (Dittman2004). Other new research suggeststhat, contrary to earlier beliefs, thegreatest changes to the parts of thebrain responsible for functions such asself-control, judgment, emotions andorganisation occur between pubertyand adulthood (Spano 2003).

Media: limited storylines have negative effects

Eckersley (2005a: 126-46) says that, as with most social changes, the media’s growing influencehas many benefits: informing, educating and entertaining people; increasing awareness ofhuman rights and environmental impacts; breaking down dogma, promoting diversity. But thestories the media tell, which define modern life, are also often driven by the lowest commondenominator in public taste. While most societies have taken great care of their stories, today’smedia present, at one level, a cacophony of conflicting messages and morals; at another, theyoffer a seductive harmony of harmful influences, both personal and social. As one media criticwarns: ‘The media claim they are only telling our stories, but societies live and die on stories’.

The mass media are:• Promoting a negative, distrustful and fearful worldview by depicting the world outside our

personal experience as one of conflict and calamity.• Defining quite arbitrarily what is and is not news, so limiting public debate on crucial issues

(and in doing so, often distracting us from the important with the trivial).• Promoting a superficial, materialistic and self-indulgent lifestyle (a way of living marked by

fleeting fads and fashions, which is, in any case, beyond the reach of growing numbers ofpeople).

• Eroding our sense of personal worth and significance by constantly parading before us thelives of people who are more powerful, more beautiful, more successful, more exciting (butwhich are, in truth, so often dysfunctional).

Eckersley (2005a: 145-6) says media effects, taken in isolation, are easy to dismiss asinsignificant relative to all the other things that impact on wellbeing. Taken together, however,these effects make the media a powerful and often destructive force. This situation amounts to‘cultural fraud’, he says: the promotion of images and ideals that serve the economy but do notmeet psychological needs or reflect social realities. ‘Never before have our images of socialrealities been so filtered and distorted. For all the cultural celebration of autonomy and self-realisation, never before have people lived so much through the experiences of others; andnever before have they been so denied the drama, dignity and romance of their own lives’.

33

However, these claims are alsostrongly contested, with otherresearchers arguing it is impossible tomake simple, direct links from thebiological to the social. In past times,people have taken on adult roles andresponsibilities at a younger age thanthey do today. Developmental andsocial processes interact in complexways in shaping young people'sresponses to their cultural world.

**5 Social versus biological factors? Someresearchers are concerned that researchfindings on neuropsychologicaldevelopment are used to reinforce a deficitmodel of young people, undermining theirstatus, creating a justification for greatersocial controls on young people, and soeroding their rights and contributions tosociety. Others say that the findings help toexplain young people’s increasedpsychosocial risk and underscore the needfor greater safeguards against the socialexploitation and manipulation of childrenand youth, including by the media.

Much of the research on the effects ofsocial change on young people’s healthand wellbeing is located within thedisciplines of social epidemiology andhealth sociology. These disciplinesunderstand ‘culture’ mainly in terms of‘subcultures’ or ‘difference’, especiallyethnic and racial difference, and so,usually, as one dimension of socio-economic status, on which the researchhas focused. However, culture alsoneeds to be seen in the broader senseof a system of meanings and symbolsthat shape how people see the worldand their place in it and give meaningto personal and collective experience.The neglect of broader trends withinthe national culture is perhaps notsurprising, given that cultures tend tobe ‘transparent’ or ‘invisible’ to thoseliving within them because theycomprise deeply internalisedassumptions and beliefs, making theireffects hard to discern. A growing

body of evidence and opinion suggeststrends in cultural qualities such asmaterialism and individualism havebeen underestimated in the research onhealth and wellbeing.

Trends towards materialism andindividualismThere are many ‘isms’ that can be saidto characterise modern Westernculture, but two of the most importantand best researched are materialismand individualism. They are alsobecoming more global in theirinfluence. Even with these culturalqualities, however, the evidence oftheir health effects often consists ofcorrelations, not causal associations, ordepends of making connectionsbetween different lines of inquiry. Inother words, the arguments rest asmuch on synthesis as on empiricalproof.

Many studies show that materialism -the pursuit of money and possessions –seems to breed not happiness butdissatisfaction, depression, anxiety,anger, isolation and alienation (Kasser2002, Eckersley 2005a: 85-96,DeAngelis 2004). People for whom‘extrinsic goals’ such as fame, fortuneand glamour are a priority in life tendto experience more anxiety anddepression and lower overall wellbeing- and to be less trusting and caring intheir relationships - than peopleoriented towards ‘intrinsic goals’ ofclose relationships, personal growthand self-understanding, andcontributing to the community. Inshort, the more materialistic peopleare, the poorer their quality of life.

Individualism – placing the individualat the centre of a framework of values,norms and beliefs, so freeing peoplefrom institutional arrangements, tiesand expectations - is supposed to beabout liberating people to live the lives

34

they want. There is no doubt that,historically, individualisation has beenassociated with a loosening of thechains of religious dogma, classoppression and gender and ethnicdiscrimination, and so with a liberationof human potential. It has expandedopportunity and made life moreexciting. Yet the reality of freedom isvery different from its ideal; it has itscosts, especially when it is taken toofar or is misunderstood.Individualisation has transformed theprocess of identity from a ‘given’ into‘task’ (Bauman 2002: xv). Thenecessity to make something on one’sself (‘obligatory self-determination’)has significant implications forcollective action and citizenship, but italso has serious implications for thelives of individuals because of thepressure endlessly to perform, achieveand re-invent one’s self (Beck andBeck-Gernsheim 2002).

Individualisation’s down-sides aredescribed in different ways: aheightened sense of risk, uncertaintyand insecurity and a lack of clearframes of reference; a rise in personalexpectations, coupled with aperception that the onus of success lieswith the individual, despite thecontinuing importance of socialdisadvantage and privilege; and asurfeit or excess of freedom andchoice, which is experienced as athreat or tyranny (Eckersley 2005a: 85-96).

All of these developments tend toloosen the individual’s ties to family,community and society, so reducingthe connectedness and support that areimportant to wellbeing. However,individualism’s effects may be deeper,more subtle, even paradoxical.Individualism may also diminishpersonal control by confusingautonomy (the ability to act according

to our own values and beliefs) withindependence (not being reliant on orinfluenced by others). This confusionencourages a perception by individualsthat they are separate from others andthe environment in which they live,and so from the very things thatinfluence their lives.

The more narrowly and separately theself is defined, the greater thelikelihood that the social forces actingon people are experienced as externaland alien, and so beyond their control.The creation of a ‘separate self’ couldbe a major dynamic in modern life,impacting on everything fromcitizenship and social trust, cohesionand engagement, to the intimacy offriendships and the quality of familylife. Increasing affluence abets thisprocess because it makes independencefinancially possible.

These possibilities are reflected in‘self-focus’ among young people thatresearch has identified (Dwyer et al2003). They also suggest that theautonomy that young people prize isthe ‘narrow’ autonomy of the separateself; it is having the flexibility andmobility to move around and betweenthe social structures of family,community, work etc, to be onlyloosely attached, uncommitted,independent. On the other hand, thetribal connectedness that other studies(eg, Mackay 2003) suggest youngpeople are embracing may be a veryhuman response to the isolation thatindependence produces. It is probablyno accident that the most popular drugstoday are those (alcohol, marijuana andparty drugs such as ecstasy) thatdissolve the boundaries of the self andinduce a sense of belonging, a mergingwith others.

ValuesValues provide the framework fordeciding what people hold to be

35

important, true, right and good, and sohave a central role in definingrelationships and meanings. Weacknowledge there is considerabledebate about the nature of moralcommunity and its current state (withinacademic circles and within particulargroups). However, it is beyond thescope of this project to provide adetailed discussion of this contentiousarea.

Work from the Australian YouthResearch Centre affirm that the valuesthat support young people’s potentialand wellbeing are those that recogniseand enhance young people’s own senseof meaning, control (or agency, oreffectiveness) and socialconnectedness. These are points thatcause us to question how relationshipsbetween the individual and society aremeditated and articulated.

Of particular interest to this report arethe values underpinning our popularnotions of ‘success’ and ‘wellbeing’.In contemporary Western societies,people seem to be well practiced atdefining themselves in terms ofsuccess, but not so good at unpickingthe different stories surrounding thisconcept to explore what values informthem. Often in public expressions,from education policy to mass media,success is being defined narrowly interms of material success.

When a community abdicates the roleof storytelling to the mass media,particularly commercial media, a focuson wellbeing or the good life isdiminished to stories about feelinggood. These stories can have a veryindividual focus. Publicly sharedstorylines about the conditions,contexts and relationships that createwellbeing are still relatively un-developed, with little focus on creatingcontexts and relationships in which all

people can grow and flourish. Perhapscommunities need more robust or‘thick’ storylines about this topic,access to alternative storylines, and tocreate safe spaces for other voices inpublic dialogue?

Research has explored the way thatyoung people engage with, andrespond to, social change. Newtechnologies, for example, mobilephones open up a whole range ofopportunities for social connection, butalso opportunities for bullying andharassment. What social values willequip them to negotiate theseencounters? Internet sites open up arange of opportunities for informationbut also to encounter the unexpected.What frameworks of values,understandings and stories will equipyoung people to deal and negotiateeffectively?

Beyond young people's sense ofprivate morality to their sense of socialethics - how do individuals make senseof ecological and social justice issues,socially available storylines about'them' and 'us' (eg. who belongs inAustralia), and possible world futures?These questions become pertinentparticularly in a context where manypublicly available storylines aredivisive and inflammatory, driven bycommercial media. How might thearea of ‘values’ be opened up to furtherexploration, research and discussionwithout falling into set positions thatare based on lived experience ortradition and do not allow for debate?

Eckersley (2005a: 43-58) argues thatmodern Western culture undermines,even reverses, universal values andtime-tested wisdom. In makingmeaning in life more individualisedand materialistic, it reduces socialcohesion, confidence, trust andstability, and leave people personally

36

more isolated and vulnerable. This, inturn, reduces a community’s moralhold on practice: values dependcritically on personal, social andspiritual ties for effect, for tangibleexpression in people’s behaviourtowards each other. So there arecomplex feedbacks in the social effectsof cultural trends.

The results of this social shift includenot so much a collapse of personalmorality, but its blurring intoambivalence and ambiguity. Withoutcultural reinforcement, people find itharder to define what is ‘good’ and todo what they believe to be ‘good’ takesmore effort. And, conversely, amongstcompeting storylines about what isvalued, it becomes easier to justify orrationalise courses of action that areinconsistent with core principles.People also perceive a widening gulfbetween private and public morality,between their own standards and thosereflected by institutions such as themedia, government and business, evenreligion. This produces a growingsense of alienation and disengagementfrom social institutions, and adeepening cynicism.

Future visionsImages of the future are an importantcomponent of culture, affecting socialcohesion and personal wellbeing.Positive images of the future allowindividuals to identify with, and workfor, social goals and national, evenglobal, priorities; they reflect a socialideal that encourages people to channeltheir individual interests into a higher,or broader, social purpose; theyprovide a broader base of meaning inlife.

An unnecessary source of confusionand contradiction about youngpeople’s potential and wellbeing iswhether they are optimistic orpessimistic about the future –

unnecessary because of the need todistinguish between personal andsocial perspectives. Hope is importantto wellbeing, and most young peopleare personally hopeful or optimistic.The role of optimism about the futureof humanity or the world is morecomplex and its effects on wellbeingare likely to be more subtle andindirect, linked to social cohesion andharmony, as already noted. Many,perhaps most, young people are notoptimistic about global futures.

Another way to look at young people’sviews of the future is to distinguishbetween expected, promised andpreferred futures. Here the social andpsychological significance lies in partin the level of tension - or degree ofcoherence - between these threefutures. Of particular importance isthat young people do not see thepromised future of economic growthand technological development asdelivering a preferred future, oraddressing the problems that dominatethe expected future.

There has been some commentaryabout the current generation of youthbeing better adapted to the change anduncertainty that characterise theirtimes, and more optimistic about futureprospects (Eckersley 2005a: 147-169).An analysis of findings from surveysof young people in 1988, 1995 and2004 was carried out for this project(Warren 2004); while the data are notstrictly comparable, they suggest norise in optimism, and even a possiblewidening of the gap between expectedand preferred futures.

The pessimism flowing from thesefailures of vision reinforces the socialisolation and detachment thataccompany materialism andindividualism, and so furtherundermines young people’s sense ofhaving shared social values.

37

Visions of the future

How people, especially the young, perceive the future – whether with hope or trepidation –matters, to them and to society. The future is part of culture and, like other cultural elements,can shape people’s personal stories, values and priorities. Surveys of young people carried outin 1988, 1995 and 2004 hint at interesting constants and changes in their outlook.

An analysis of the findings for this project suggest that, overall, optimism has not increasedsince 1988 – if anything the reverse is true (Warren 2004). The following results focus on theattitudes of young women in 1995 and 2004. When asked to choose between two positivescenarios of the future of Australia, 64 per cent in 1995 and 87 per cent in 2004 said theyexpected a ‘growth’ society focused on individual wealth, economic growth and efficiency andenjoying ‘the good life’; 34 per cent and 9 per cent, respectively, expected a ‘green’ societyfocused on community, family, equality and environmental sustainability. Asked whichscenario they preferred, 13 per cent in 1995 and 9 per cent in 2004 chose ‘growth’ and 84 percent and 82 per cent, respectively, chose ‘green’. In other words, the 2004 girls were less likelyto expect the future they preferred.

A series of questions asking respondents to agree or disagree with a series of statements aboutthe impacts of science and technology suggest some interesting possible shifts in attitude,some positive, but more negative. Thus agreement that:• computers and machines would take over the world fell from 40 to 28 per cent;• computers and robots were taking over jobs fell from 59 to 42 per cent;• governments would use new technologies to watch and regulate people more fell from

74 to 69 per cent.

On the other hand, agreement that:• science and technology offered the best hope for meeting the challenges ahead fell from

64 to 40 per cent.• science and technology were alienating and isolating people from each other and nature

rose from 55 to 73 per cent;• science would find ways to conquer new diseases fell from 85 to 73 per cent;• technological advances would make democracy stronger and give people more control

fell from 38 to 24 per cent;• science and technology would find ways of solving environment problems fell from 40 to

25 per cent;• science would find ways to produce enough food for the growing world population fell

from 35 to 20 per cent.The survey findings are not strictly comparable because the 2004 findings are from a pilotstudy. Even without implying any trends, however, the results hardly reveal widespread faith inthe future young people expect or are promised.

Religion and spiritWellbeing, especially positivewellbeing, is strongly related tomeaning in life. People can findmeaning at a variety of levels. Closestto people’s lives, there is families andfriends, work, interests and desires.

Many people today find meaning in thepursuit of personal goals. Then there isthe level of identity with a nation orethnic group, and with a community.At the most fundamental, transcendentlevel, there is spiritual meaning: asense of having a place in the universe.Spirituality represents the broadest and

38

deepest form of connectedness. It is theonly form of meaning that transcendspeople’s personal circumstances, socialsituation and the material world, and sohas a powerful capacity to sustain themthrough adversity.

Spiritual traditions offer powerfulstorylines about wellbeing: wholeness,the purpose and the nature of ‘success’,values and the nature and state ofcommunity. Because of this, questionsabout spirituality sit at the heart ofunderstanding how individualsnegotiate life, and how collectively ascommunities we negotiate uncertainty.

This may be the subject matter thatmost fundamentally underpinsconversations about success andwellbeing. Ironically the role ofspirituality appears to be the hardesttopic for people to discuss. People tendto hold their own views very closelyand discuss with their own kind.Outside the study of religion andspirituality, the role of spirituality inindividual and communal wellbeing isnot discussed much in research circles.The same applies to broader public andpolicy conversations. Australia hasalso tended to be reluctant to draw theexploration of spiritual traditions intoeducation.

Spiritual traditions include the largerstories of how people across differentplaces and times have dealt with toughlife issues, or the human conditionitself. Where there is silence on thesematters, there are limited resources,limited storylines available to youngpeople as they negotiate their ownlives.

Religion is the most common form ofthe cultural expression of spirituality.Research shows that religious beliefand practice enhance health andhappiness (Argyle 2002, Myers 2005).

The benefits flow from the socialconnections, spiritual support, sense ofpurpose, coherent belief system andmoral code that religion provides. Allthese things can be found in otherways, although perhaps less easily;religions ‘package’ many of theingredients of wellbeing. At the sametime, religion is no panacea. Itsstorylines have been used to justifywars and other atrocities. Americansstand out from the people of otherdeveloped nations in the strength oftheir religious belief and observance;yet the United States compares poorlyon many social indicators, including itshuman rights record, life expectancy,crime, poverty, inequality.

More importantly, the mainlystatistical correlations on which theassociations between religion andwellbeing are based barely scratch thesurface of the role of spirituality. Itsessence makes it extraordinarilydifficult for science to grasp andanalyse, as is clear from the work ofTacey, who has written extensively onspirituality. He argues ‘spirit’ plays acrucial and yet largelyunacknowledged role in wellbeing,especially that of young people. Youngpeople who become depressed, suicidalor fatigued in response to thehopelessness that confronts the worldare living symbolic lives, he says(Tacey 2003: 176). Their struggleswith meaning are not just personalstruggles. ‘They are trying to sort outthe problems of society, and theirsuffering, deaths and ruptures are notjust personal tragedies butcontributions to the spiritual dilemmasof the world.’

In a paper prepared earlier for thisproject, Tacey (2002) says secularsocieties have not understood themeaning of spirit, nor recognised itscapacity to nurture and transform.

39

People today live in a modern world ofimproved services and faster machines,but they do not ‘feel’ any betterbecause the thing that justifies andvalidates their existence is missing, hesays. They are forced to acknowledgethat what gives meaning and value tolife is mysterious and elusive. Today,the central problem is how to speak ofspirit outside the religious traditionsthat apparently no longer speak tomany people.

Researchers have also noted thatAustralians, on the whole, have tendedto have ambivalent relationships toorganised religion. Australia’s historyhas been very different to, for example,the United States. Non-indigenousAustralians have a history of violenceagainst, and ignorance of, indigenousspirituality, and have tended to show alack of insight into how thesetraditions might locate peoples in termsof relationship to each other and theland. Alongside this sits an uneasytolerance (or recently outrightsuspicion) of other migrant spiritualtraditions.

Along with a movement away fromtraditional religious institutions like thechurch, there has been a correspondingrise in eclectic, hybrid, deeply personal

expressions of spirituality. Apart fromTacey’s work, researchers like Webber(2002), Berger and Ezzy (2004), andVerdouw (2004) reveal that manyAustralian young people are engagingdeeply with spirituality and moralcommunity, and exploring differentforms of their expression. Others maybe seeking alternative paths (eg. the‘rave’ scene) to transcendence (Siokou2002).

In a time of uncertainty,fundamentalist traditions are alsogrowing. This seems to represent a re-claiming of some certainties. Drawingon a Freudian analysis, Tacey(2003:24) offers an alternativeexplanation: where something has beenrepressed at the heart of a culture, itappears at the fringes in a mutant form.Beyond church institutions, at a policyand program level, conversations aboutspirituality are rare, but are nowappearing from the political fringesparticularly in the form offundamentalism.

We believe the topic of spirituality isan important element of discussionsabout young people’s success andwellbeing. There is clearly room formore exploration.

40

The power of ritual

An issue for young people in contemporary society is the opportunity for meaningful rituals tomake sense of life, and meaningful rites of passage, particularly when the traditional marks foradulthood have been moved. A range of Australian research on youth issues relates stories ofyoung people claiming their own rituals and rites of passage (eg, Berger and Ezzy 2004).

Tacey (2002) says that, growing up in central Australia, he was constantly impressed by theeffects of ‘initiation’ on adolescent tribal members of Aboriginal cultures. The initiation wouldtake them out of the haze of adolescence and its typical rebelliousness, and make themresponsible and creative members of adult society, not by rational means (the lure of job,money, materialism) but by non-rational means (contact with a spiritual/cosmic reality as thesource of new maturity).

Paradoxically, it is contact with that which is ‘other’ than human that teaches us how to betruly human. In anthropological terms, it is respect for the sacred that makes society possible.Without sacred experience and initiation, individuals become wayward, rebellious, unruly,lawless. As spiritual initiation disappears from community life, the uninitiated seek destructiveexpressions because at a deep level they do not feel they belong to society.

Tacey (2004) says he once asked an Aboriginal leader why so many youth – Aboriginal andnon-Aboriginal - were harming themselves, and was told, ‘They don’t know who they are’. Theleader explained that the task of culture was to tell a person who he or she really was. ‘Whenthey know who they are, they no longer want to harm themselves, for they have received, as agift from life, their true dignity and worth.’

Implications and futuredirections

The examination of a wide variety ofAustralian longitudinal studies onyouth that formed the starting point ofthis study has confirmed that youngpeople’s wellbeing is closely related tothe social conditions that surroundthem. Research provides an insightinto various dimensions of how youngpeople are faring in terms of theirhealth and wellbeing. Almostinevitably, however, the data on illhealth tends to dominate. Studies ofdisease, morbidity, risk and disabilityprovide an objective measure of youngpeople’s (ill)health status.Understandings and measures ofpathways to success and wellbeingtend to be less well developed.

The stories young people tell aboutthemselves and their world offer a wayof weaving together the various layersor levels of examining andunderstanding health and wellbeing.There are at least four of these layers,each offering a different perspective.

• Individual: wellbeing is a subjectiveproperty of individuals; researchdistinguishes between the ill and thewell; causes of ill health are ‘near’and direct (exposure to toxin orpathogen, conflict or abuse);treatment of individual disease anddisability, usually with clinical andbiomedical interventions; healthpromotion focuses on changinghealth-related behaviour (diet,exercise, smoking, drinking etc).

• Social: acknowledges broad social,economic and environmental factorsbehind population patterns of

41

wellbeing; acknowledges patternsof disadvantage, marginalisationand poverty; interventions seek toaddress social inequalities and therisks associated with them, either byreducing inequalities or changingindividual behaviour.

• Cultural: sees wellbeing asinfluenced by broader, less tangible,characteristics of individuals andtheir relationship to society,including worldviews, beliefs,stories and values; interventionsseek to enhance these qualities atboth individual and social levels.

• Spiritual: wellbeing reflects thedeepest level of meaning forindividuals, a sense of having aplace in the world, being part of ‘thegrand scheme of things’; its essenceis mysterious and elusive, so hardfor science to grasp and explain;interventions are in the realm ofreligion and other forms of spiritualexpression.

Flashpoints: Issues for further researchAcross the youth sector there isincreasing recognition of the need forcross-sectoral practice and ‘whole-of-government’ solutions. In this contextthe development of processes foreffective inter-disciplinaryconversations – where participants candisagree but still stay at the table – isvital. This report has sought tohighlight both common ground anddivergence between disciplinaryunderstandings of the key issuessurrounding young people’s wellbeing.The ‘flashpoints’ include:

• The extent to which research findingsfrom different disciplines can beexplained and reconciled. Youngpeople’s subjective assessments oftheir wellbeing and healthconstitute a different measurefrom other tests of health status.They are not measuring the samething and it is difficult to knowhow to draw effectively on both togain a balanced picture.

Reflections on stories, research and policy

The notion of stories may be an appropriate way to think about research and policy. There isincreasing interest in the way in which the stories that individuals and social groups tell aboutthemselves and others are constructed in the context of 'discourses', or socially sharedstorylines that are selective in the particular truths that they tell (following Foucault 1980).From this perspective, findings of the longitudinal studies from different disciplines embody arange of different and cross-cutting storylines about what is happening for young people. Thestories of different professions in relation to young people locate different understandings of‘the problem’ and frame the role of professionals differently in relation to solutions (Wyn andWhite 1997). The different stories are disciplinary artefacts: reflecting the different types ofevidence bases used to denote truth, and types of stories in which ‘people like us’ arespecifically interested (or not).

This separation makes sense until the space researchers, policy makers and professionalsoccupy becomes particularly complex. There is a growing body of work across research andpolicy arenas that now talks of the need to work in cross-disciplinary ways in order to dealeffectively with the cross-cutting nature of social problems. This is particularly evident acrossthe youth and community sectors, where there are increasing calls for professionals to gobeyond disciplinary and professional culture, the organisational ‘silos’ of health, education, andso on, and to work holistically (eg, see Riddell and Tett 2002, Wierenga et al 2003).

42

• Whether overall trends in wellbeingcan be generalised to describe thesituation of different generations.Is life getting better or worse?Participants asked whether it wasmeaningful to attempt todistinguish the health andwellbeing of a generation (forexample, Gen X or Y) fromprevious generations. Critics arguethat in generalising, the full extentof diversity within, andcontinuities across, generations areobscured. Others suggest thequestion encourages a closerscrutiny of the 'big picture' ofsocial change and the totality ofthe evidence.

• Whether potential and wellbeingalways belong together. Can potential and wellbeing bedistinguished and the trends ineach move in opposite directions?It may be that freeing andequipping people to realise theirfull potential entails risks towellbeing because of the increasedrisk of failure.

• The relative importance of socialinfluences and individuals’ owncapacities in determining wellbeing.This question focuses on theextent to which the social andeconomic environment can be saidto affect wellbeing, regardless ofyoung people’s capacities tointerpret, critique, subvert andresist these influences.

• The relative influence of social andbiological factors in shapingwellbeing. Some suggest thatrecent findings onneuropsychological developmentunderscore the need for greatersafeguards for children and youth.

Others are concerned thatdevelopmental arguments can beused to justify greater socialcontrols.

We see a need for fuller exploration ofthese issues, for more conversation andmapping across areas ofinterdisciplinary tension.

Signposts for research and policySeveral ‘signposts’ – pointers forfuture research and policydevelopment – emerged from theproject. These include the need formore focus or emphasis on thefollowing:

• The big picture – young people incontext: The ongoing impact ofsocial change on successivegenerations places a responsibilityon researchers to document andanalyse these changes. Policymakers must also ensure thatyoung people’s lives are not beinginterpreted from the viewpoint ofoutmoded ideas and conditions.An example is the need torecognise that many young peopletoday are often concurrentlyworkers and students, and haveincreasingly complex lives, withassociated health consequences.Young people’s owninterpretations provide importantinsights into many contemporaryissues. Without such input,policies, interventions and servicesfor young people are likely to befragmented and silo-based and outof step with their lives.

• Wellbeing: One of the mostsignificant effects of social changeover the last 20 years has been: (1)an increase in several measures ofill health, especially mental health;

43

and (2) an increased level ofconcern about health andwellbeing across all groups, butparticularly young people. A focuson total health and wellbeing isespecially important in the area ofyouth policy because: (1) it retainsa link with ‘big-picture’ issues; (2)it focuses on pathways to ‘livingwell’ as a universal measure, aswell as acknowledging the need tofocus on particular risk groups andproblems; and (3) it provides aframework for crossing sectoralboundaries and identifies thepoints of permeability betweendisciplines and sectors. It alsohighlights the need for a ‘whole oflife’ approach: all policy becomesyouth policy.

• The mainstream: The pace of socialchange has outstripped theusefulness of the idea of a‘mainstream’ of young peoplewho are ‘OK’ and an identifiableminority who are ‘at risk’ andrequire targeting. At some time,most individuals will facedifficulties (for example, a periodof depression or unemployment).The implication is that bothtargeted and universal policymeasures and interventions arenecessary. One disadvantage offocusing solely on ‘target’ groupsas a basis for research or policy isthat it tends to reinforce sectoraland disciplinary boundaries andultimately limits the potential tounderstand and solve the problem.

• Social and cultural resources:Both contemporary and historicalresearch reveals a strong inter-generational effect on people’s lifechances, reflecting differentialaccess to material and culturalresources. More research needs tobe developed to understand how

this process works. Other researchreveals the significance ofnarratives or ‘stories’ that enableindividuals to connect their liveswith people around them and tomake sense of their world. Accessto resources depends upon webs ofrelationships. This means youngpeople’s wellbeing depends uponcreating conditions for trust andexchange of resources, betweenyoung people and significantothers, within families, and withincommunities. From a policy pointof view, this finding indicates theimportance of supporting thedevelopment of social and culturalresources, as well as the economicand material resources.

• Inter-disciplinary dialogue andgrounding implications for policyand practice: This project hashighlighted the potential ofsupported dialogue within andbetween some key groups:researchers (from across differentdisciplines), policy makers andprofessional (across the youth andcommunity sector). Two areas ofpossibility have emerged: firstlyfurther shared inquiries and inter-disciplinary synthesis aroundspecific areas related to youngpeople’s wellbeing; and secondlyexploring processes for knowledgetranslation from synthesis tosignposts, and to policy andpractice.

This project has achieved much inidentifying – and bringing out into theopen – critical differences(‘flashpoints’) in disciplinaryperspectives, as well as the ‘signposts’for further research and policydevelopment. It has created a body ofknowledge from which it will bepossible to direct research andinterrogate policy. It has established a

44

platform for ongoing dialogue betweendisciplines and professions, so falseclosure on important issues can beavoided. In terms of drawing down theimplications of this project, there ismore work to be done; through theseflashpoints and signposts we havesimply begun the task.

Importantly, the findings of this workhighlight that the most effective policyresponses will not be simply aboutattempting to enhance young people’sresilience, flexibility and adaptabilityand so to mould them to suit changingsocial circumstances. Realising youngpeople’s potential and optimising theirwellbeing also mean shaping socialconditions to suit their needs.

These signposts signal the need toacknowledge that broad social changesdo not ‘just happen’, but flow from thechoices people make, individually andcollectively; to question the often-assumed links between means and endsthat underpin these changes; forcommunities to claim space forconversations about things of value;and to allow time for reflection, forasking questions as well as seekingsolutions.

Youth researchers, policy makers andprofessionals in the project's finalworkshop expressed interest inongoing conversations which wouldassist them to locate their own workwithin a bigger picture of evidencearound young people's wellbeing. Theyacknowledged the value of knowingthat their day-to-day activity is part ofa larger, shared strategy towards youngpeoples’ wellbeing. However, policymakers and practitioners also stressedthe importance of an extra step –grounding the ‘big picture’ findings.

Their input particularly highlighted aneed for processes that elaborate ‘big-picture’ research into clear signpostsfor policy and practice. Knowledgetranslation is important, and there is acorresponding need – more broadly -to explore processes that mightdevelop ideas from synthesis tosignposts, and to policy and practiceand back. In terms of this project, wefeel there is also more work to do, andwe are exploring opportunities tofurther develop the signposts listed. Tothis end we welcome comments.

We would welcome your comments on this report. Please sendthese to Ani Wierenga at:

wierenga@unimelb.edu.au.

45

Appendix

Research PanelDr John Ainley, Australian Council for Educational Research

(Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth)Ms Rosemary Aird, University of Queensland

(Mater-UQ Study of Pregnancy)Prof Lois Bryson, RMIT

(Women's Health Australia Study)Dr Jane Dixon, Australia 21 and ANUMr Richard Eckersley, Australia 21 and ANU (project director)Dr Gary Marks, Australian Council for Educational Research

(Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth)Prof Janet McCalman, University of MelbourneDr Julie McLeod, Deakin University

(The 12 to 18 Project)Prof George Patton, University of Melbourne

(Victorian Adolescent Health Cohort Study and other studies)Prof Margot Prior, University of MelbourneMs Diana Smart, Australian Institute of Family Studies

(Australian Temperament Project)Ms Irene Verins, VicHealthDr Ani Wierenga, University of Melbourne (Project research associate)

(Making a Life Project)Prof Johanna Wyn, University of Melbourne

(Life Patterns Study)

Research Panel Workshops

May 25-26, 2004John AinleyLois BrysonRosemary AirdJane DixonRichard EckersleyJanet McCalmanJulie McLeodGeorge PattonMargot PriorDiana SmartIrene VerinsAni WierengaJohanna Wyn

November 11-12, 2004Rosemary AirdRichard EckersleyGary MarksJanet McCalmanJulie McLeodMargot PriorIrene VerinsAni WierengaJohanna Wyn

GuestsJohn SpieringsDavid TaceyElisabeth Northam

Youth Policy Workshop

June 29, 2005Rosemary AirdBev BeggLyndal BondLuke Bo’sherJenny Brown,Richard EckersleyGeorgie FerrariLill HealeyCraig HodgesRebecca GardnerKellie Ann JollyGary MarksRob MoodieJanet McCalmanSusan McDowellJulie McLeodAmanda SmithMary TobinJohn ToumbourouIrene VerinsLyn WalkerDan WoodmanAni WierengaJohanna WynTrudy WyseJulie Marr (note- taker)

46

References

ABS (1998). Mental Health and Wellbeing: Profile of Adults, Australia 1997[Catalogue No. 4326.0], Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics.

ABS (2005). Australian Social Trends 2005 [Catalogue No. 4102.0], Canberra:Australian Bureau of Statistics.

AIHW (2003). Australia’s Young People: Their Health and Wellbeing 2003 [AIHWCatalogue no. PHE-50], Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

AIHW (2005). A Picture of Australia’s Children [AIHW Catalogue no. PHE-58],Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

Aird, R., Najman, J. & Shuttlewood, G. (2004). TheHealth and Wellbeing ofAustralian Adolescents Over Time: The Difficulties Associated with AssessingChange from Available Mental Health Data, Unpublished paper prepared forthe ‘Realising Human Potential’ project.

Argyle, M. (2002). ‘State of the Art Religion’, Psychologist, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 22.Atkinson, S. & Nixon, H. (2005). ‘Locating the Subject: Teens Online @ Ninemsn’,

Discourse, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 387-409.Bauman, Z. (2002). ‘Individually, Together’ in U. Beck & E. Beck-Gernsheim,

Individualization, Sage: London.Beck, U. & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization, Sage: London.Berger, H. & Ezzy, D. (2004). ‘The Internet as Virtual Spiritual Community: Teen

Witches in the United States and Australia,’ in LL. Dawson & DE. Cowan(eds.) Religion Online: Finding Faith on the Internet, New York: Routledge.

Bruner, J. (1987). 'Life as Narrative', Social Research, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 11-32.Cahill, H., Shaw, G., Wyn, J. & Smith, G. (2004). Translating Caring into Action,

Melbourne: Australian Youth Research Centre.Carrington, V. & Marsh, J. (2005). ‘Digital Childhood and Youth: New Texts, New

Literacies’, Discourse, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 279-285.Collishaw, S., Maughan, B., Goodman, R. & Pickles, A. (2004). ‘Time Trends in

Adolescent Mental Health’, Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, vol.45, pp. 1350-1362.

Connell, RW., Ashenden, D., Kessler, S. & Dowsett, G. (1982). Making theDifference: Schools, Families and Social Division, Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

DeAngelis, T. (2004). ‘Consumerism and its discontents’, Monitor on Psychology,vol. 35, no. 6, p. 52.

Denzin, NK. (1978). Sociological Methods: A Sourcebook, New York: McGraw-Hill.Diener, E. & Seligman, MEP. (2004). ‘Beyond Money: Toward an Economy of

Wellbeing’, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1-31.

Dittman, M. (2004). ‘Protecting Children from Advertising’, APA Monitor onPsychology, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 58.

Dwyer, P., Smith, G., Tyler, D. & Wyn, J. (2003). Life Patterns, Career Outcomesand Adult Choices, Melbourne: Australian Youth Research Centre.

Dwyer, P., Smith, G., Tyler, D. & Wyn, J. (2005). Immigrants in Time: Life-Patterns2004, Melbourne: Australian Youth Research Centre.

Dwyer, P. & Wyn, J. (2001). Youth, Education and Risk: Facing the Future, London:Routledge/Falmer.

Eckersley, R. (2005a). Well & Good: Morality, Meaning and Happiness (2nd Ed.),Melbourne: Text Publishing.

47

Eckersley, R. (2005b). ‘What is Wellbeing, and What Promotes It? Background to aManifesto for Wellbeing’, The Wellbeing Manifesto, The Australia Institute,Canberra, Available: http://www.wellbeingmanifesto.net/wellbeing.htm.

Evans, K. (2002). ‘Taking Control of their Lives? Agency in Young Adult Transitionsin England and the New Germany’, Journal of Youth Studies, vol. 5, no. 3, pp.245-270.

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings,New York: Pantheon Books.

Frankl, VE. (1984). Man's Search for Meaning, New York: Washington Square Press.Freire, P. (1973). Education for Critical Consciousness. New York: Seabury Press.Furlong, A. & Cartmel, F. (1997). Young People and Social Change:

Individualization and Risk in Late Modernity, St Leonards, NSW: Allen andUnwin.

Geertz, C. (1973). 'Thick Description: Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture' inC. Geertz (ed.) The interpretation of cultures, New York: Basic Books.

Gergen, KJ. & Gergen, MM. (1988). 'Narrative and the Self as Relationship',Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 21, pp. 17-56.

Hagell, A. (2004). Time Trends in Adolescent Wellbeing, London: NuffieldFoundation.

Jorm, AF. & Butterworth, P. (2006). ‘Changes in Psychological Distress in AustraliaOver an 8-year Period: Evidence of Worsening in Young Men’, AustralianNew Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 47-50.

Kasser, T. (2002). The High Price of Materialism, Cambridge, Massachusetts: MITPress.

Kessler, RC., Berglund, P., Demler, O., Jin, R. & Walters, EE. (2005a). ‘LifetimePrevalence and Age-of-Onset Distributions of DSM-IV Disorders in theNational Comorbidity Survey Replication’, Archives of General Psychiatry,vol. 62, pp. 593-602.

Kessler, RC., Chiu, WT., Demler, O. & Walters, EE. (2005b). ‘Prevalence, Severity,and Comorbidity of DSM-IV Disorders in the National Comorbidity SurveyReplication’. Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 62, pp. 617-627.

Lee, C. (ed.) (2001). Women’s Health Australia: What Do We Know? What Do WeNeed to Know? Progress on the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’sHealth, 1995-2000, Brisbane: Australian Academic Press.

Lévi-Strauss, C. (1979). The Raw and the Cooked: Introduction to a Science ofMythology: I, New York: Octagon Books.

Lloyd, J. (2002). ‘Challenging the Media’, The Australian Financial Review, 25October 2002, pp. 1, 2, 11.

Luthar, SS. (2003). ‘The Culture of Affluence: Psychological Costs of MaterialWealth’, Child Development, vol. 74, pp. 1581-1593

Luther, SS. & Latendresse, SJ. (2005). ‘Children of the Affluent: Challenges toWellbeing’, Current Directions in Psychological Science, vol. 14, no. 1, pp.49-53.

Mackay, H. (2003). The Wrap: Understanding Where We Are Now and Where We’veCome From. The Mackay Report: 1979-2003, Sydney: Mackay Research.

Marks, G. & Fleming, N. (1999). ‘Influences and Consequences of Wellbeing AmongAustralian Young People: 1980-1995’, Social Indicators Research, vol. 46,pp. 310-232.

48

Myers, DG. (2005). ‘Psychological Science and Spiritual pursuits’ in CL. Harper Jr,(ed.) Spiritual Information: 100 Perspectives, Radnor, PA: TempletonFoundation Press.

McCalman, J. (2004). A Historian’s View of Post-Industrial Youth, Paper prepared forAustralia 21.

McLeod, J. & Yates, L. (2006). Making Modern Lives: Subjectivity, Schooling andSocial Change, New York: State University of New York Press.

Najman, JM., Aird, R., Bor, W., O’Callaghan, M., Williams, GM. & Shuttlewood,GJ. (2004). ‘The Generational Transmission of Socio-Economic Inequalitiesin Child Cognitive Development and Emotional Health’, Social Science andMedicine, vol. 58, pp. 1147-1158.

Patton, W. (2001). ‘Career Education: What We Know, What We Need to Know’,Australian Journal of Career Development, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 13-19.

Peel, M. (2003). The Lowest Rung: Voices of Australian Poverty, New York:Cambridge University Press.

Prior, M. & Richardson, S. (eds.) (2005). No Time to Lose: The Wellbeing ofAustralia's Children, Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

Putnam, R. & Feldstein, L. (2003). Better Together, New York: Simon & Schuster.Research Directions Reference Group (2004). Five Research Themes and Related

Consultant Priorities and Recommendations, Perth: Australian ResearchAlliance for Children and Youth.

Riddell, S. & Tett, L (2001). ‘Education, Social Justice and Inter-agency Working:Joined-up or Fractured Policy?’ in S. Riddell & L. Tett (eds.) Education,Social Justice and Inter-agency Working: Joined-up or Fractured Policy?,London: Routledge Falmer.

Rutter, M. & Smith, DJ. (eds.) (1995). Psychosocial Disorders in Young People: TimeTrends and Their Causes, Chichester: John Wiley and Sons for AcademiaEuropaea.

Sawyer, MG., Arney, FM., Baghurst, PA., Clark, JJ,. Graetz, BW., Kosky, RJ.,Nurcombe, B., Patton, GC., Prior, MR., Raphael, B., Rey, J., Whaites, LC. &Zubrick, SR. (2000). The Mental Health of Young People in Australia,Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.

Siokou, C. (2002). ‘Seeking the Vibe: The Melbourne Rave Scene’, Youth StudiesAustralia, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp.11-18.

Smart, D. & Sanson, A. (2005). ‘What is Life Like for Young Australians Today, andHow Well are They Faring?’ Family Matters, no. 70, Autumn, pp. 46-53.

Spano, S. (2003). ‘Adolescent Brain Development’ Youth Studies Australia, vol. 22,no. 1, pp. 36-38.

Stanley, F., Richardson, S. & Prior, M. (2005). Children of the Lucky Country? HowAustralian Society has Turned its Back on Children and Why Children Matter,Sydney: Pan Macmillan.

Strauss, AL. (1977). Mirrors and Masks: The Search for Identity, London: MRobertson.

Tacey D. (2002). Why Spirit has to be Added to Our Research Agenda, Paperprepared for Australia 21.

Tacey, D. (2003). The Spirituality Revolution, Sydney: HarperCollins.Tacey, D. (2004). ‘Spiritual Perspectives on Suicidal Impulses in Young People’,

Wilson Family Memorial Public Lecture, St Peters Lutheran College,Brisbane, 16 August 2004.

49

Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity,Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cambridge University Press.

Tucci, J., Goddard, C. & Mitchell, J. (2004). The Concerns of Australian Parents,Melbourne: Australian Childhood Foundation.

Tucci, J., Mitchell, J. & Goddard, C. (2005). The Changing Face of Parenting,Melbourne: Australian Childhood Foundation.

Verdouw, J. (2004). ‘A Good Life?’, paper presented at School of Sociology SeminarSeries, Hobart, Tasmania.

Warren, B. (2004). Report for ‘Views of the Future’ from Australian Youth, Canberra:National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health.

Webber, R. (2002). ‘Young People and their Quest for Meaning’, Youth StudiesAustralia, vol. 21, no. 1, pp.40-43.

White, M. (1995). Re-Authoring Lives: Interviews and Essays by Michael White,Adelaide: Dulwich Centre Publications.

White, M. (1997). Narratives of Therapists' Lives, Adelaide: Dulwich CentrePublications.

White, M. & Epston, D. (1990). Narrative Means to Therapeutic Ends, New York:Norton.

White, R. & Wyn, J. (2004). Youth and Society: Exploring the Social Dynamics ofYouth Experience, Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Wierenga, A. (1999). 'Imagined Trajectories: Local Culture and Social Identity' in R.White (ed.) Australian Youth Subcultures: On the Margins and in theMainstream, Hobart: Australian Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.

Wierenga, A. (2001). Making a Life, PhD thesis, Hobart: University of Tasmania.Wierenga, A. (2002). ‘Losing and Finding the Plot: Storying and the Value of

Listening to Young People’, Scottish Youth Issues Journal, vol. 4, pp. 9-30.Wierenga, A., Wyn, J., Glover, S. & Meade, M. (2003). Application of Enabling State

Principles in the Delivery of Youth Services, Melbourne: Australian YouthResearch Centre.

Williams, GM., O’Callaghan, M., Najman, JM., Bor, W., Richards, D. & U, C.(1998). ‘Maternal Cigarette Smoking and Child Psychiatric Morbidity: ALongitudinal Study’, Pediatrics, vol. 102, p. e11.

Woodman, D. (2004). ‘Responsibility and Time for Escape: The Meaning ofWellbeing to Young Australians’, Melbourne Journal of Politics, vol. 29, pp.82-94.

Wyn, J. (2000). ‘The Postmodern Girl: Education, “Success” and the Construction ofGirls’ Identities’ in J. McLeod & K. Malone (eds.) Researching Youth,Hobart: Australian Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.

Yates, L. & McLeod, J. (2000). ‘Social Justice and the Middle’, The AustralianEducational Researcher, vol. 27, pp. 59-78.