4524.0 - In Focus: Crime and Justice Statistics, July 2012
ARCHIVED ISSUE Released at 11:30 AM (CANBERRA TIME) 25/07/2012
Page tools:
 Print Page
 Print All
| ||||
On this page:
Generally, victims of actual or attempted break-in and/or physical or threatened violence living in households with equivalised incomes in the highest quintile had better outcomes on the social wellbeing indicators than victims of the selected crimes living in households with equivalised incomes in the lowest quintile. While the relationship between household income and social wellbeing is complex, lower household income may reduce the ability of people to use resources and access services and supports. Often where the pattern for victims of the selected crimes followed the pattern for the general population, there were still differences between victims and persons not experiencing the selected crimes, with victims of selected crimes having poorer social wellbeing outcomes. This suggests that experiences of crime victimisation may worsen the poor outcomes on some of the social wellbeing indicators for certain income groups. Generalised trust Victims of actual or attempted break-in and/or physical or threatened violence who lived in households falling under the lowest and second household income quintiles (35.3% and 37.8%) were less likely to agree that in general people could be trusted, compared to victims of the selected crimes living in households falling under the fourth and highest household income quintiles (54.2% and 58.1%). The trend for the general population was more flattened, however victims of the selected crimes living in households falling under the highest household income quintile were more likely to agree that people in general can be trusted, compared to victims living in households that fall under the lower household income quintiles. The largest difference between persons that were and persons that were not a victim of the selected crimes was in the two lowest household income quintiles, with victims less likely than persons that were not victims to agree that people in general can be trusted (35.3% and 52.2% for the lowest quintile, and 37.8% and 57.1% for the second quintile). 11. PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO AGREE THAT IN GENERAL PEOPLE CAN BE TRUSTED by WHETHER A VICTIM OF SELECTED CRIMES and EQUIVALISED HOUSEHOLD INCOME Trust in police Victims of actual or attempted break-in and/or physical or threatened violence living in households falling under the lowest household income quintile were less likely to agree that the police could be trusted (42.7%) than victims in households falling under the fourth (56.2%) and highest household income quintile (64.0%). This follows the trend for the wider population, however, victims of the selected crimes were less likely than persons that did not experience the selected crimes to agree that the police can be trusted in households falling under the lowest (42.7% and 58.0%), second (51.6% and 63.8%), third (45.7% and 67.2%) and fourth (56.2% and 72.3%) household income quintiles. 12. PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO AGREE THE POLICE CAN BE TRUSTED by WHETHER A VICTIM OF SELECTED CRIMES and EQUIVALISED HOUSEHOLD INCOME Ability to raise emergency money Victims of actual or attempted break-in and/or physical or threatened violence living in households falling under the highest household income quintile were more likely to live in households that had the ability to raise $2,000 when needed (97.6%) than victims living in households falling under the lowest household income quintile (48.7%), which is consistent with the trend in the general population. However, victims of the selected crimes were less likely than persons that were not victims of the selected crimes to be able to raise emergency money in households falling under the lowest (48.7% and 70.8%), second (63.2% and 78.6%) and third household income quintiles (66.0% and 90.2%). 13. PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO WERE IN HOUSEHOLDS ABLE TO RAISE $2,000 IF NEEDED by WHETHER A VICTIM OF SELECTED CRIMES and EQUIVALISED HOUSEHOLD INCOME Perception of social disorder Victims of actual or attempted break-in and/or physical or threatened violence living in households falling under the highest household income quintile (24.3%) were less likely than victims living in households falling under the lowest (40.6%) and second household income quintiles (43.2%) to perceive a social disorder issue in their local area as a big problem. This trend was consistent with the trend in the general population, with persons living in households falling under the highest household income quintile (19.0%) less likely to perceive a big social disorder problem than persons living in households falling under the lowest household income quintile (24.0%). Victims of the selected crimes were more likely to identify a big social disorder problem in their local area than than persons that were not victims of the selected crimes in all household income quintiles except the highest quintile. The proportion of victims who perceived a big social disorder problem in their local area was around double that for persons who were not victims in the lowest (40.6% and 20.6%) and second household income quintiles (43.2% and 18.1%). 14. PROPORTION OF PEOPLE PERCEIVING A BIG SOCIAL DISORDER PROBLEM IN THEIR LOCAL AREA by WHETHER A VICTIM OF SELECTED CRIMES and EQUIVALISED HOUSEHOLD INCOME Personal stressors Victims of actual or attempted break-in and/or physical or threatened violence living in households falling under the lowest household income quintile (83.0%) were more likely to have experienced a personal stressor in the 12 months prior to their interview than victims living in households falling under the third (67.7%), fourth (72.3%) and fifth household income quintiles (67.2%). The general population showed no statistically significant differences between household income quintiles for persons who had experienced a personal stressor. Victims of the selected crimes were more likely than persons that were not victims to have experienced at least one stressor in the lowest (83.0% and 57.2%), second (84.6% and 57.1%) and fourth household income quintiles (72.3% and 60.1%). 15. PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED AT LEAST ONE PERSONAL STRESSOR IN PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS by WHETHER A VICTIM OF SELECTED CRIMES and EQUIVALISED HOUSEHOLD INCOME Whether attended a community event Victims of actual or attempted break-in and/or physical or threatened violence living in households falling under the highest household income quintile (86.4%) were more likely to have attended a community event in the six months prior to interview than victims living in households falling under the lowest (65.2%), second (62.7%) and third household income quintiles (68.2%). This finding is consistent with the trend for the general population. However, victims of the selected crimes living in households falling under the lowest and highest household income quintiles were still more likely to attend a community event than persons that were not victims and living in households falling under the same household income quintiles (49.0% and 75.0%). 16. PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO ATTENDED A COMMUNITY EVENT IN THE PREVIOUS 6 MONTHS by WHETHER A VICTIM OF SELECTED CRIMES and EQUIVALISED HOUSEHOLD INCOME Ability to receive support in times of crisis Victims of actual or attempted break-in and/or physical or threatened violence living in households falling under the lowest household income quintile were less likely to be able to receive support in times of crisis (88.0%) than victims living in households falling under the third (95.7%) and fourth household income quintiles (97.5%). This was consistent with the trend for the general population, and there were no statistically significant differences across the the different household income quintiles between persons that had experienced a selected crime and persons that had not. CONCLUSION Overall, victims of actual or attempted break-in and/or physical or threatened violence living in households with equivalised incomes in the highest quintile had better outcomes on the social wellbeing indicators than victims of the selected crimes living in households with equivalised incomes in the lowest quintile. Often where the pattern for victims of the selected crimes followed the pattern for the general population, there were still differences between victims and persons not experiencing the selected crimes, with victims of selected crimes having poorer social wellbeing outcomes. FOOTNOTES 1. Household income is a gross measure that includes all current receipts that are usually or regularly received by the household or by individual members of the household, and which are available for, or intended to support, current consumption. This includes receipts from wages and salaries (including salary sacrificed income), profit or loss from own unincorporated business (including partnerships), net investment income (e.g. interest, rent, dividends), government pensions and allowances, and private transfers (e.g. superannuation, workers' compensation, income from annuities, child support and financial support from family members not living in the same household). Gross household income is the sum of the income from all these sources before income tax, the Medicare levy and the Medicare levy surcharge are deducted. Back 2. Equivalised gross household income quintiles are used to compare groups of the population according to their relative income levels. Gross household income is adjusted using an equivalence scale. For a lone person household it is equal to gross household income. For a household comprising more than one person, it is an indicator of the gross household income that would need to be received by a lone person household to enjoy the same level of economic well-being as the household in question. For more detail see Appendix 2 in the explanatory notes of General Social Survey, Australia, 2010 (cat.no 4159.0). Back
|
||||