Associations between ongoing COVID‐19 lockdown and the financial and mental health experiences of Australian families. Issue 1 (26th December 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Price, Anna M. H.; Contreras‐Suárez, Diana; Zhu, Anna; Schreurs, Natalie; Measey, Mary‐Anne; Woolfenden, Sue; Burley, Jade; Bryson, Hannah; Efron, Daryl; Rhodes, Anthea; Goldfeld, Sharon
• Is Part Of: Australian journal of social issues. Volume 58:Issue 1(2023)
• Page Start: 173
• Page End: 193
• Publication Date: 2022-12-26
• Subjects: COVID‐19 -- lockdown -- mental health -- parenting -- poverty; Australia -- Social policy -- Periodicals; Social service -- Australia -- Periodicals; Australia -- Social conditions -- Periodicals; Social conditions; Social service; Social policy; Australia; Periodicals; 362.99405
• DOI: 10.1002/ajs4.252
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0157-6321

Abstract

Abstract: In 2020, Australia's successful COVID‐19 public health restrictions comprised a national "initial lockdown" (March–May) and "ongoing lockdown" (July–November) for metropolitan Victorian residents only. We evaluated associations between ongoing lockdown and family finances and mental health. In the June and September 2020 Royal Children's Hospital National Child Health Polls, caregivers of children in Victoria and New South Wales (NSW) reported the following: job/income loss; material deprivation (inability to pay for essential items); income poverty; mental health (Kessler‐6); perceived impact on caregiver/child mental health; and caregiver/child coping. Data from caregivers ( N = 1207/902) in June/September were analysed using difference‐in‐difference modelling (NSW provided the comparator). During Victoria's ongoing lockdown, job/income loss increased by 11% (95%CI: 3%–18%); Kessler‐6 poor mental health by 6% (95%CI: −0.3%–12%) and perceived negative mental health impacts by 14% for caregivers (95%CI: 6%–23%) and 12% for children (95%CI: 4%–20%). Female (vs. male) caregivers, metropolitan (vs. regional/rural) families, and families with elementary school‐aged children (vs. pre‐/high‐school) were the most affected. The ongoing lockdown was associated with negative experiences of mental health, employment and income, but not deprivation or poverty, likely because of government income supplements introduced early in the pandemic. Future lockdowns require planned responses to outbreaks and evidence‐informed financial and mental health supports.