• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Placement instability among young people removed from their original family and the likely mental health implications

    2017-11-29 03:16:06SimonRICESueCOTTONKristenMOELLERSAXONECathrineMIHALOPOULOSAnneMAGNUSCarolHARVEYCathyHUMPHREYSStephenHALPERINAngelaSCHEPPOKATPatrickMCGORRYHelenHERRMAN
    上海精神醫(yī)學(xué) 2017年2期
    關(guān)鍵詞:收容不穩(wěn)定性照料

    Simon RICE, Sue COTTON, Kristen MOELLER-SAXONE, Cathrine MIHALOPOULOS,Anne MAGNUS, Carol HARVEY, Cathy HUMPHREYS, Stephen HALPERIN, Angela SCHEPPOKAT ,Patrick MCGORRY, Helen HERRMAN,*

    ?Original research article?

    Placement instability among young people removed from their original family and the likely mental health implications

    Simon RICE1,2,3, Sue COTTON1,2, Kristen MOELLER-SAXONE1,2, Cathrine MIHALOPOULOS4,Anne MAGNUS4, Carol HARVEY5,6, Cathy HUMPHREYS7, Stephen HALPERIN1,2,3, Angela SCHEPPOKAT1,2,Patrick MCGORRY1,2,3, Helen HERRMAN1,2,*

    out-of-home care, residential care, foster care, adolescent mental health

    1. Introduction

    Young people in out-of-home care in Australia and other countries are vulnerable to poor health outcomes compared to their peers who grow up in biological families.[1,2]Their health and wellbeing problems can be complex and difficult to manage including developmental delay, substance misuse, sexual and mental health problems.[3,4]The numbers of young people entering out-of-home care are increasing,[5]and while many young people in out-of-home care settings demonstrate resilience across multiple domains of functioning[6]and may subsequently thrive, the majority appear to experience significant difficulties in the transition to adulthood.[7]An evidence-base is needed to promote effective intervention with these young people. Adolescence is an important stage when mental health needs can be high, yet little is known about the characteristics of young people aged 12-17 years in out-of-home care, nor the prevalence of factors that have an adverse effect on their mental health.

    Young people are legally required to leave the state protection of out-of-home care at the age of 18 in Australia. They then encounter limited opportunities for work or further education[8]and are at significant risk of homelessness.[9]A longitudinal study of young people leaving care in Australia reported that nearly 50% had attempted suicide within four years.[10]One in three young women had become pregnant or given birth within 12 months of leaving care.[11]International research has found that up to 35% of young people in state care had become homeless within 12 months of leaving care.[12]

    International research also showed the main predictors of poor mental health for young people in out-of-home care were placement instability,intellectual disability, and either older age at entry into care, or very early placement into residential care.[13,14]Little is known about potential gender differences in care type characteristics. The main protective factor is younger age at entry into home-based care (i.e., kinship or foster care).[15,16]According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), the number of children and young people in out-of-home care is growing by 5% per annum, and while the overall number of children and young people in residential care (i.e., outof-home care provided in a small residence with paid staff) is relatively low (7%), almost all (84.6%) within this residential care group are aged 10 or older.[17]Of great concern are the numbers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people in out-of-home care, with a likelihood of being in care vastly exceeding that of non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children.[17]

    Young people in the out-of-home care sector who experience placement disruption and instability(i.e. multiple short-term placements, failed family reunification) are at significant risk of poorer health outcomes. Research suggests that placement instability in the out-of-home care sector is relatively common,[18,19]though a trend in Australian data suggests that kinship care is more stable than other forms of care.[20]Instability within out-of-home care environments has significant implications for the development of secure attachment,[16]although some forms of care (i.e., kinship care) appear to be more protective than others against the development of attachment problems.[20]When a young person experiences a number of sequential short-term out-ofhome care placements, there are likely to be difficulties in undertaking a proper assessment of her or his needs.[21,22]Australian data showed that young people settled in one placement for most (i.e. 75%) of their time in out-of-home care experienced a wide range of better outcomes (i.e., employment, stability of housing,education, substance use, mental health, criminal behaviour) than those with multiple placements.[11]

    At present, little research exists on the background demographic and care type characteristics of young people in Australia’s out-of-home care sector. In particular, there is no reliable estimate of the number of young people identifying as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, nor of culturally and linguistically diverse young people. These groups are likely to have particular needs influenced by their backgrounds, experiences and cultures. Such data are urgently needed as a step towards improved interagency collaboration and intensified use and evaluation of new and proven effective interventions, and application of culturally appropriate supports for young people in care.[23]In this paper, we report data from a Census of young people aged 12-17 years living in out-of-home care within north-western and south-eastern Melbourne in 2014.The Census was designed to gather information on characteristics that may predispose young people in care to mental health difficulties and that may guide or be amenable to intervention. Specifically, we focus on demographic characteristics of these young people as well as differences in placement history and care type(home-based versus residential care).

    2. Methods

    2.1 Participants

    The Census involved collection of demographics,placement information, cultural and linguistic backgrounds, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders status, and registered disability status of youth on child protection orders. The Census was conducted between 18th August 2014 and 29th August 2014 across four non-government child and youth community service organisations (CSOs) in Melbourne. These organisations are broadly representative of the main providers of out-of-home care for children and young people in the Northwest and Southeast Region of Melbourne (see Figure 1).

    Six care types were noted:(1) adolescent care program (volunteer foster carers providing supportive home environment and care to young people aged 12 -17 years); (2) foster care (care is provided in the private home of a substitute family receiving payment intended to cover the child’s living expenses); (3) therapeutic foster care (home-based treatments provided by foster carers who have received specialised training); (4)kinship care (caregiver is a family member or a person with a pre-existing relationship with the child);(5) lead tenant (volunteer carer who lives in a house with one or two young people who are learning independent living skills) and (6) residential care (out-of-home care provided in a residence where there are paid staff,including rostered staff within Victorian CSOs where there are typically no more than four young people in one house).

    2.2 Materials

    The Census data collection tool comprised 10 questions. These questions assessed age, gender,placement type, country of birth, languages other than English, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status,registered disability status, age of first removal from family of origin, and number of previous placements over the (a) past year, (b) past 3 years, and (c) lifetime(see Appendix 1).

    2.3 Procedure

    Approval was granted by The University of Melbourne Human Research Ethics Committee (1340674). The Victorian Department of Human Services Research Coordinating Committee and CSO research committees also provided approval. Research assistants attended each of the CSOs and worked directly with centre staff to identify and record details of participants for the Census.

    2.4 Statistical Methods

    All analyses were completed in SPSS 22.0. Summary statistics were calculated and Pearson correlation was used to examine the association of age of first removal from family of origin and placement duration.Group differences (i.e., gender, care type and cultural background) were evaluated using chi-square, t-test and factorial analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), with age at census treated as a covariate. Bonferroni adjusted post-hoc analyses determined significant differences between groups. Comparisons were made between home-based care (aggregation of foster, therapeutic foster, adolescent care program, kinship, and lead tenant) and residential care types, regarding age,number of placements in past year (i.e., categorised as 1, 2, 3-4, 5-10), and lifetime placements (i.e.,categorised as 1, 2, 3-4, 5-10, 10+).

    3. Results

    3.1 Background characteristics

    The Census of 322 young people was almost evenly split by gender, with 47.2% (n=152) males and 52.8% (n=170)females. The mean (SD) age of young people was 14.9(1.6) with those enumerated ranging from 12 to 17 years,median=15 (see Table 1). Overall 38.8% (n=125) of the cohort were aged between 12-14 years of age.

    Figure 1. Flowchart of study

    The minority had registered disability status (10.4%,n=33), or were born overseas (8.0%, n=25). For those born overseas, region of birth included Africa (i.e.,Congo, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone n=14), Asia (i.e., Burma,Japan, Vietnam; n=3), Middle East (i.e., Iraq, Syria;n=2) and New Zealand / Canada (n=6). The mean age of arrival in Australia was 8.2 (4.1) years (n=17, min=3,max=16). Relatively few young people spoke an additional language (10.5%, n=34). The most frequent other languages were Arabic (n=7) and Vietnamese(n=5), and sign language (i.e., AUSLAN, n=5). A total of 19.3% (n=62) of the young people in the Census identified as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islanders.Relative to the general population, young people from Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander backgrounds were overrepresented (3% of the total Australian population is identified as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background24). There were no significant gender differences in the Census across any of the background demographic variables (see Table 1).

    Table 1. Demographics & Care Characteristics

    3.2 Care characteristics

    Of the single groupings, residential care was the most common care type (35.7%, n=115), followed by homebased foster care (27.0%, n=87), and home-based kinship care (19.9%, n=64) (see Table 1). Age of first removal from original family ranged from 0–17 years,with a mean (SD) of 9.10 (4.54) years. Half the sample were first removed from their families earlier than 10 years of age (0-5 years, 20.4%, n=59; 6-10 years, 30.4%,n=88), with the remaining 11-15 years (45%, n=130)and 16-17 years (3.7%, n=12). There was no gender difference for age of first removal. Children from an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background were significantly younger at age of first removal with a mean (SD) of 7.02 (4.6) years than non-Indigenous children with a mean (SD) of 9.58 (4.4), t(308)=3.96,p<0.001. Those in residential care settings were marginally older at 15.15 (1.41) years than that in home-based care at 14.71 (1.72) years, t(320)=-2.253,p<0.018. Given this, age was treated as a covariate in relevant between-group analyses below.

    3.3 Number of placements

    In the previous year, 69.6% (n=224) of children had only one previous placement, 17.7% (n=57) had two placements, 7.8% (n=25) had 3-4 placements, and 4.3%(n=14) had 5-10 placements. Over their lifetime, 23.1%(n=74) of children had only one previous placement,13.8% (n=44) had two placements, 24.4% (n=78) had 3-4 placements, 26.3% (n=84) had 5-10 placements,and 12.4% (n=40) had more than 10 placements.Accordingly, 63.1% of the sample were considered to have experienced placement instability (i.e., ≥3 lifetime placements before age 18). There were no significant associations between gender or Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background for placement instability,either previous year, or lifetime (all p>0.05).

    3.4 Duration of current placement

    Duration at current placement ranged from 0 to 180 months with a mean(SD) 29.42 (36.41). Earlier age of removal was associated with longer time (months) spent at current placement (r= -0.48, p<0.001). The effects of gender and placement type on length at current placement were evaluated by factorial ANCOVA. There was a significant effect of placement type on the mean duration of the current placement F(5,305)=12.595,p<0.001, η2=0.171, though neither the gender main effect, the gender × placement type interaction, or covariate (age) were significant. Bonferonni adjusted post hoc tests indicated a pattern of significantly shorter duration of current placement for those in residential or lead tenant care relative to foster care or kinship care (see Table 3 for post hoc tests and means).

    3.5 Number of lifetime placements

    Number of lifetime placements ranged from 1 to 22 with a mean (SD) of 4.74 (4.19). When examined categorically, there was a significant association between placement instability and care type (χ2[18,N=320]=63.018, p<0.001). Table 2 shows that relativeto other care types, kindship care was associated with greater placement stability (i.e., either 1 or 2 lifetime placements). Factorial ANCOVA indicated a significant effect of placement type on the total number of lifetime placements F(5,307)=8.247,p<0.001, η2=0.118, though neither the main effect for gender, the gender × placement type interaction, or the covariate (age) were significant.Post hoc tests indicated several significant group differences, with young people in residential care experiencing significantly more lifetime placements at 6.29 (4.92) compared to those in foster care 4.35 (4.05),Bonferonni adjusted p=0.010 (M=4.35, SD=4.05,p=0.010) and (kinship care mean [SD] 2.48 [1.93],Bonferonni adjusted p<0.001), while those in kinship care experienced fewer placements than those in lead tenant placements (mean [SD] 5.72 [3.74], Bonferonni adjusted p=0.036). Hence, young people in kinship care were more likely than other care types to have a single placement, and experienced significantly fewer lifetime placements than young people in residential care or lead tenant care.

    Table 2. Previous lifetime placements by current placement type

    Table 3. Duration (months) of Current Placement by Placement Type and Gender

    3.6 Home-based and residential care comparisons

    Analyses were undertaken comparing those young people currently in home-based care types (aggregation of foster, therapeutic foster, adolescent care program,kinship, and lead tenant) with those currently in residential care by gender. Factorial ANCOVA indicated that youth in residential care had almost double the number of previous lifetime placements than youth in home-based care, respective means 6.29 (4.92) and 3.88 (3.41), F(1,315)=26.082, p<0.001, η2=0.076. A significant difference was also observed for number of placements in the previous year where those in residential care 1.83 (1.57) had on average more lifetime placements than those in home-based care 1.34(1.42), F(1,317)=8.458, p=0.004, η2=0.026. There was no significant gender difference, gender × care type interaction, or covariate (age) in these analyses.Nonetheless, youth in home-based care were almost two years younger at age of first removal 8.50 (4.59),compared to those in residential care 10.20 (4.27) ,t(308)=-3.18, p=0.002. Hence, residential care was associated with greater placement instability, and older age of first removal from family of origin.

    Chi-square analyses were conducted to assess for care type (home-based / residential) difference in number of previous year, and lifetime placements. The effect on number of placements in previous year was not significant, but the lifetime (categorical) placements by care type was significant, χ2(18, N=320)=41.93,p<0.001. Youth in residential care settings were more than three times as likely to have experienced >10 placements than were those in home-based care. Relative to care type, for those in residential care 73% (n=84)had experienced ≥3 placements, while for those in home-based care, 57.5% (n=118) had experienced ≥3 placements (see Figure 2). Youth from an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background were more frequently placed in home-based care settings (79.0%, n=40) than residential care (21.0%, n=13), χ2(1, N=322)=7.27,p=0.007.

    4. Discussion

    4.1 Main findings

    This research presented the first systematic census of characteristics of young Australians (12-17 years) in the out-of-home care sector. It includes young people linked with the major community service organisations(CSOs) engaged in this work in two of the four regions of metropolitan Melbourne. Only by doing such descriptive studies are background population status and trends identified. The young people were, on average, removed from their family of origin by the State in mid-childhood. The census reveals that three out of four of these young people have a lifetime historyof more than one placement in home-based or residential care programs, with more than a third having experienced five or more lifetime (to date) placements. Based on the definition established by Webster and colleagues[18](i.e.,≥3 lifetime placements), almost two thirds (63.1%) of those enumerated experienced placement instability. The census also included a comparatively large proportion of young people who were from an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Island background. In addition, close to 10% of those enumerated were born overseas, suggesting there may be specific cultural needs for this population. When taken together, and from the perspective that secure or reparative attachments are known to be associated with positive mental health and functioning,[16,20]the present figures warrant further examination, exploration of contributing factors and concern.

    Figure 2. Number of lifetime placements by home-based/residential care type

    4.2 Limitations

    The reported rate of the young people enumerated in the census with a registered disability (10%) was lower than our expectations, and our CSO partners since previously published reports have identified between 22% and 42% young people living in out-of-home care have a registered disability.[28]This discrepancy could possibly reflect a lack of access to relevant CSO assessment and diagnosis records, although we could detect no indication of this. A further limitation is that our Census enumerated only those young people in the outof-home care sector who are registered with CSOs. Given that a growing proportion of young people are placed directly in kinship care by the state child protection services without invoking the case management services of CSOs (as state child protection protocols change), this data is necessarily incomplete. Further, as census data was collated at CSO sites in a de-identified manner, it is not possible to link this to individual health or mental health outcomes in further studies.

    A second census of the same CSOs will be conducted in 2016 and any change in the rates examined here will be reported, providing valuable trend data over a three year period. A number of current initiatives are designed to respond to emotional difficulties and disturbed behaviour among young people in home-based and residential out-of-home care(e.g., therapeutic foster care, Roadmap for Reform[29]). In particular, The Ripple Project[30]is evaluating a universal mental health promotion intervention that provides capacity development and support to community case managers and carers. It is hoped that such companion work will strengthen the therapeutic capacities of outof-home carers of young people and have an impact on rates of placement stability. Greater placement stability is likely to be an important mediating variable between improved health and function of carers and that of the young people in out-of-home care.

    4.3 Implications

    To our knowledge, these data are unique. While previous work has examined placement instability for those removed in early childhood (i.e., between 0 and 6 years[18]), we are aware of only one other Australian study to have reported placement history (i.e.,instability) of young people in the out-of-home care sector across the 12-17 age range.[25]Our study includes a high proportion of young people living in residential care (35.7% of the sample), compared with 5% when all age groups and all care classifications (including those young people who are sent directly to kinship care without CSO case management) are considered.[17]The Pathways of Care longitudinal study of children in out-of-home care in Australia included children and young people in all care classifications. It showed that 42% remained in their current placement for 18 months or more: compared with the current study, a longer period than that observed for young people in residential care, but substantially shorter than that for home-based care.[25]Of note, in the current study,young people in kinship care were more likely than other care types to experience stable placements(i.e., <3 lifetime placements), and reported overall significantly fewer lifetime placements than those in residential or lead tenant care. Comparable work from the US has examined differential patterns of placement instability, reporting a sizeable minority (19.8%) as having an unstable pattern characterised by multiple brief placements (less than 9 months), associated with significantly higher internalising and externalising behaviour problems.[19]

    Given the paucity of existing data regarding placement instability, significant informational needs exist (for, carers, policy makers, protective services and researchers) concerning young people living within the out-of-home care sector throughout Australia.[23]The lack of routinely collected and publicly available information about the number, characteristics and circumstances of young people living in out-of-home care in Melbourne is a situation similar in other Australian states and in other countries.[13]

    Existing literature[11,21]indicated that placement stability was one of the essential ingredients required for young people in care to overcome their difficulties.Hence, stable care conditions have a greater chance of ameliorating the difficulties often associated with interpersonal trauma and helping the youth in these circumstances to gain an education, employment and a life as a citizen with good mental health. The present study indicates for the first time the degree of current and lifetime instability by care type in this population.The current configuration of the out-of-home care system appears to offer stable care to a minority of its residential youth, 50% of its home based youth, and the associations of placement stability/instability with mental health outcomes need further study.

    Home-based foster or kinship care is designed as a humane replacement for the large institutions and orphanages of bygone days in our community.Orphanages and institutions create conditions recognised as deleterious for mental health and future function as adults.[26]These include strict routines,lack of personal relationships and isolation from wider society. Many countries promote foster-care programs and their equivalents as a better care solution.However, these programs can be just as harmful as institutionalization to a child’s future mental health and function if the care is unstable.[27]Further, in many cases carers have little access to support for themselves and their role as de facto parents in demanding circumstances.

    5. Conclusions

    Significant lifetime placement instability has been identified in the population of young people living in out-of-home care in Melbourne. Since instability is a risk factor for mental health problems and consequent life-time opportunities regarding employment,education and criminality, further examination of the causal pathways and implementation research are needed so that the risks can be redressed with effective interventions where possible.

    Funding

    The Ripple Study is funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Targeted Call for Research 1046692. Prof. Sue Cotton is supported by NHMRC Career Development Fellowship (APP1061998).Prof. Helen Herrman is supported by an NHMRC Fellowship. Prof. Cathrine Mihalopoulos is supported by an NHMRC Early Career Fellowship (APP1035887). Dr Simon Rice is supported by an Early Career Fellowship from the Society of Mental Health Research.

    Conflict of interest statement

    The authors report no conflicts of interest.

    Ethical approval

    Approval was granted by The University of Melbourne Human Research Ethics Committee (1340674). The Victorian Department of Human Services Research Coordinating Committee, Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee (2014-046) and CSO research committees also provided approval.

    Authors’ contribution

    The study was originally conceived by HH, SC, CM, AM,CH, SH and PM. Management of data collection, data cleaning and project oversight undertaken by KMS and AS. The data analysis plan was developed by HH, KMS,SC and SR. Data analysis and reporting was undertaken by SC and SR. All authors collaborated significantly to manuscript development and editing. All authors approved the final submitted version.

    1. Nathanson D, Tzioumi D. Health needs of Australian children living in out-of-home care. J Paediatr Child Health.2007;43(10): 695-699. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1754.2007.01193.x

    2. Vinnerljung B, Salln?s M. Into adulthood: A follow- up study of 718 young people who were placed in out- o fhome care during their teens. Child & Family Social Work.2008;13(2): 144-155. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2206.2007.00527.x

    3. Sawyer MG, Carbone JA, Searle AK, Robinson P. The mental health and wellbeing of children and adolescents in homebased foster care. Med J Aust. 2007;186(4): 181

    4. Webster SM, Temple-Smith M. Children and young people in out-of-home care: are GPs ready and willing to provide comprehensive health assessments for this vulnerable group? Aust J Prim Health. 2010;16(4): 296-303. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/PY10019

    5. Zwi KJ, Henry RL. 13. Children in Australian society. Med J Aust. 2005;183(3): 154

    6. Daining C. Resilience of youth in transition from outof-home care to adulthood. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2007;29(9): 1158-1178. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.04.006

    7. Mendes P. Graduating from the child welfare system a case study of the leaving care debate in Victoria, Australia.J Soc Work. 2005;5(2): 155-171. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468017305054970

    8. Mendes P, Moslehuddin B. From dependence to interdependence: Towards better outcomes for young people leaving state care. Child Abuse Rev. 2006;15(2): 110-126. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/car.932

    9. Cummins P, Scott D, Scales B. Report of the Protecting Victoria’s Vulnerable Children Inquiry. Melbourne: Department of Premier and Cabinet; 2012

    10. Cashmore J P M. Longitudinal Study of Wards Leaving Care.Sydney: Social Policy Research Centre; 2007

    11. Cashmore J, Paxman M. Predicting after‐care outcomes:the importance of ‘felt’ security. Child & Family Social Work 2006;11(3): 232-241. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2206.2006.00430.x

    12. Barton S, Gonzalez R, Tomlinson P. Therapeutic Residential Care for Children and Young People. London: Jessica Kingsley;2012

    13. Stein M, Dumaret AC. The mental health of young people aging out of care and entering adulthood: Exploring the evidence from England and France. Child Youth Serv Rev.2011;33(12): 2504-2511. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.08.029

    14. Thoburn J, Courtney ME. A guide through the knowledge base on children in out-of-home care.J Child Serv. 2011;6(4): 210-227. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17466661111190910

    15. Fisher PA. Review: Adoption, fostering, and the needs of looked-after and adopted children. Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2015;20(1): 5-12. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/camh.12084

    16. Tarren-Sweeney M. The mental health of children in out-ofhome care. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2008;21(4): 345-349. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0b013e32830321fa

    17. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Child protection Australia 2014–15. Child welfare series no. 63. Cat. no.CWS 57.Canberra: Australian Government; 2016

    18. Webster D, Barth RP, Needell B. Placement stability for children in out-of-home care: A longitudinal analysis. Child Welfare. 2000;79(5): 614

    19. James S, Landsverk J, Slymen DJ. Placement movement in out-of-home care: Patterns and predictors. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2004;26(2): 185-206. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2004.01.008

    20. Tarren-Sweeney M, Hazell P. Mental health of children in foster and kinship care in New South Wales, Australia. J Paediatr Child Health. 2006;42(3): 89-97. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1754.2006.00804.x

    21. Fallesen P. Identifying divergent foster care careers for Danish children. Child Abuse Negl. 2014;38(11): 1860-1871.doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2014.08.004

    22. Berrick J. When children cannot remain home: Foster family care and kinship care. Future Child. 1998;8: 72-87

    23. Mendes P, Snow PC, S Baidawi. Young people transitioning from out-of-home care in Victoria: Strengthening support services for dual clients of child protection and youth justice. Australian Social Work. 2014;67(1): 6-23. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2013.853197

    24. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Estimates of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, June 2011. Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2013

    25. Paxman M, Tully L, Burke S, Watson J. Pathways of Care:Longitudinal study on children and young people in out-ofhome care in New South Wales. Family Matters. 2014;94: 15

    26. Chugani HT, Behen ME, Muzik O, Juhász C, Nagy F,Chugani DC. Local brain functional activity following early deprivation: a study of postinstitutionalized Romanian orphans. Neuroimage 2001;14(6): 1290-1301. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/nimg.2001.0917

    27. Humphreys KL, Gleason MM, Drury SS, Miron D, Nelson CA,Fox NA, et al. Effects of institutional rearing and foster care on psychopathology at age 12 years in Romania: follow-up of an open, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Psychiatry.2015;2(7): 625-634. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(15)00095-4

    28. Mitchell G. Children with Disabilities Using Child and Family Welfare Services. Melbourne: OzChild; 2013

    29. Victorian State Government. Roadmap for Reform: Strong Families, Safe Children; 2016

    30. Herrman H, Humphreys C, Halperin S, Monson K, Harvey C, Mihalopoulos C, et al. A controlled trial of implementing a complex mental health intervention for the carers of vulnerable young people living in out-of-home care: The ripple project. BMC Psychiatry. 2016;16(1): 436. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12888-016-1145-6

    年輕人離開(kāi)原生家庭后安置不穩(wěn)定性及可能的心理健康影響

    Rice S, Cotton S, Moeller-Saxone K, Mihalopoulos C, Magnus A, Harvey C, Humphreys C, Halperin S, Scheppokat A, Mcgorry P, Herrman H

    收容照料、社區(qū)照料、寄養(yǎng)照料、青少年心理健康

    Background:Young people in out-of-home care are more likely to experience poorer mental and physical health outcomes related to their peers. Stable care environments are essential for ameliorating impacts of disruptive early childhood experiences, including exposure to psychological trauma, abuse and neglect. At present there are very few high quality data regarding the placement stability history of young people in out-of-home care in Australia or other countries.

    Objectives:To undertake the first systematic census of background, care type and placement stability characteristics of young people living in the out-of-home care sector in Australia.

    Methods:Data was collected from four non-government child and adolescent community service organisations located across metropolitan Melbourne in 2014. The sample comprised 322 young people(females 52.8%), aged between 12 – 17 years (mean age=14.86 [SD=1.63] years).

    Results: Most young people (64.3%) were in home-based care settings (i.e., foster care, therapeutic foster care, adolescent care program, kinship care, and lead tenant care), relative to residential care (35.7%).However, the proportion in residential care is very high in this age group when compared with all children in out-of-home care (5%). Mean age of first removal was 9 years (SD=4.54). No gender differences were observed for care type characteristics. Three quarters of the sample (76.9%) had a lifetime history of more than one placement in the out-of-home care system, with more than a third (36.5%) having experienced ≥5 lifetime placements. Relative to home-based care, young people in residential care experienced significantly greater placement instability (χ2=63.018, p<0.001).

    Conclusions:Placement instability is common in the out-of-home care sector. Given stable care environments are required to ameliorate psychological trauma and health impacts associated with childhood maltreatment, well-designed intervention-based research is required to enable greater placement stability, including strengthening the therapeutic capacities of out-of-home carers of young people.

    [Shanghai Arch Psychiatry. 2017;29(2): 85-94.

    http://dx.doi.org/10.11919/j.issn.1002-0829.216090]

    1Orygen, The National Centre of Excellence in Youth Mental Health, Melbourne, Australia

    2Centre for Youth Mental Health, The University of Melbourne, Australia

    3Orygen Youth Health, NorthWestern Mental Health, Melbourne Health, Melbourne, Australia

    4Deakin Health Economics, Centre for Population Health Research, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia

    5Psychosocial Research Centre, Department of Psychiatry, The University of Melbourne, Australia

    6NorthWestern Mental Health, Melbourne, Australia

    7Department of Social Work, The University of Melbourne, Australia

    *correspondence: Professor Helen Herrman. Mailing address: The National Centre of Excellence in Youth Mental Health; Centre for Youth Mental Health,The University of Melbourne, 35 Poplar Road, Parkville, Victoria, 3052, Australia. E-Mail: helen.herrman@orygen.org.au

    背景:收容機(jī)構(gòu)中的兒童青少年和同齡人相比可能存在較差的心身健康水平。穩(wěn)定的機(jī)構(gòu)照料環(huán)境對(duì)改善早期童年經(jīng)歷所致破壞性影響是非常重要的,童年經(jīng)歷包括心理創(chuàng)傷、虐待和忽視。目前,澳大利亞或其他國(guó)家很少有關(guān)收容機(jī)構(gòu)中兒童青少年的安置穩(wěn)定性高質(zhì)量研究的數(shù)據(jù)。

    目標(biāo):首次針對(duì)澳大利亞在收容機(jī)構(gòu)生活中的兒童青少年進(jìn)行系統(tǒng)的背景、照料類型、和安置穩(wěn)定性特征的調(diào)查。

    方法:2014年收集了墨爾本市區(qū)的四家民間兒童青少年社區(qū)服務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)的數(shù)據(jù)。樣本包括322名年輕人(女性占52.8%),年齡在12 - 17歲之間[平均年齡=14.86,(SD = 1.63)年 ]。

    結(jié)果:在收容機(jī)構(gòu)中,相對(duì)于社區(qū)收容照料類型(35.7%),大多數(shù)年輕人(64.3%)是基于家庭養(yǎng)育照料模式(即寄養(yǎng)、治療型寄養(yǎng)照料、青少年照料模式、親屬照料、以及認(rèn)領(lǐng)照料)。然而,與所有收容照料的孩子相比,這個(gè)年齡組被社區(qū)收容比例是較高的(5%)。第一次被社區(qū)收容的平均年齡為9歲(SD= 4.54)。不同的照料類型均無(wú)性別差異。其中有248人(76.9%)曾在收容照料系統(tǒng)中有一個(gè)以上的安置場(chǎng)所,有117人(36.5%)經(jīng)歷了超過(guò)5個(gè)安置場(chǎng)所。相對(duì)于家庭養(yǎng)育照料者,社區(qū)收容的兒童青少年經(jīng)歷了更顯著的安置不穩(wěn)定性(χ2=63.018, p<0.001)。

    結(jié)論:安置不穩(wěn)定性在收容照料機(jī)構(gòu)是常見(jiàn)的現(xiàn)象。需要一個(gè)穩(wěn)定的照料環(huán)境來(lái)改善被虐待兒童所導(dǎo)致的心理創(chuàng)傷和健康影響。精心設(shè)計(jì)并以干預(yù)為基礎(chǔ)的研究能夠增加安置穩(wěn)定性,包括強(qiáng)化對(duì)兒童青少年收容照料者的治療能力。

    Dr. Simon Rice obtained a combined Master of Psychology (Clinical) / PhD degree (5 years total) the School of Psychology, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia in 2012. And he also completed a Grad.Cert. in Clinical Epidemiology (University of Newcastle, AUS) in 2014. He is currently working as a research fellow & clinical psychologist in the Centre for Youth Mental Health, the University of Melbourne. He is a board-approved supervisor and is also a clinician in the Youth Mood Clinic at Orygen Youth Health. He is a member of Australian Psychology Society and Early Career Advisory Group committee. He has both a clinical and research interest in mood disorders in young people, vulnerable populations and e-mental health interventions. His PhD focused on the assessment of depression in men, the key outcome of which was the Male Depression Risk Scale, a validated multidimensional screening tool for assessing externalizing symptoms associated with distress in men. He has been highly productive since graduating from his PhD, receiving a number of national and international competitive awards, >$2.5M AUD in research funding, and has published 46 peer reviewed papers.

    猜你喜歡
    收容不穩(wěn)定性照料
    照料父母對(duì)子女健康福利的影響研究
    ——基于CFPS 2016年數(shù)據(jù)的實(shí)證分析
    學(xué)中文
    正式照料抑或非正式照料:照料模式對(duì)高齡老人臨終照料成本的影響①
    南方人口(2021年1期)2021-02-28 08:26:30
    收容教育制度退出歷史舞臺(tái)
    可壓縮Navier-Stokes方程平面Couette-Poiseuille流的線性不穩(wěn)定性
    收容教育所舉辦文藝匯演
    土地廟
    增強(qiáng)型體外反搏聯(lián)合中醫(yī)辯證治療不穩(wěn)定性心絞痛療效觀察
    無(wú)微不至照料留守兒童
    前列地爾治療不穩(wěn)定性心絞痛療效觀察
    伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 一本精品99久久精品77| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 色综合站精品国产| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 久久久久久久午夜电影| 亚洲av日韩精品久久久久久密| 十八禁网站免费在线| 亚洲18禁久久av| 国产成人福利小说| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va | 天堂动漫精品| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 久久久久久久久久黄片| 88av欧美| www.999成人在线观看| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 听说在线观看完整版免费高清| 18禁在线播放成人免费| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 乱人视频在线观看| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱 | 亚洲经典国产精华液单 | 欧美激情在线99| 免费观看人在逋| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 男人舔奶头视频| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 啦啦啦观看免费观看视频高清| 亚洲av电影不卡..在线观看| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 精品午夜福利在线看| 亚洲内射少妇av| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va | or卡值多少钱| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图 | 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| 黄色日韩在线| 亚洲精品在线美女| 亚洲成人久久性| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 精品人妻视频免费看| avwww免费| 久久久久久久久久黄片| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 女人十人毛片免费观看3o分钟| 全区人妻精品视频| 久久精品91蜜桃| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 看黄色毛片网站| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 国产成人福利小说| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 99久国产av精品| av黄色大香蕉| 国产高清三级在线| 国产亚洲精品综合一区在线观看| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 欧美日韩瑟瑟在线播放| 久久国产精品影院| 亚洲 国产 在线| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 日韩有码中文字幕| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 欧美区成人在线视频| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 日韩欧美三级三区| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 欧美一区二区亚洲| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 能在线免费观看的黄片| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 如何舔出高潮| 日本一本二区三区精品| netflix在线观看网站| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 久久久成人免费电影| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 俺也久久电影网| 很黄的视频免费| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 高清在线国产一区| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| netflix在线观看网站| 成人国产综合亚洲| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 午夜福利18| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 亚洲色图av天堂| 午夜福利高清视频| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看| 怎么达到女性高潮| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| 一夜夜www| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| aaaaa片日本免费| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 天堂av国产一区二区熟女人妻| 看十八女毛片水多多多| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 中文字幕人成人乱码亚洲影| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 色哟哟·www| 久久午夜福利片| 国产成人aa在线观看| 亚洲第一电影网av| 色综合婷婷激情| .国产精品久久| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 一区福利在线观看| 色哟哟·www| 色播亚洲综合网| 亚洲国产色片| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 亚洲色图av天堂| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 亚洲,欧美精品.| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 桃红色精品国产亚洲av| 国产成人欧美在线观看| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 91狼人影院| 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 国产91精品成人一区二区三区| 综合色av麻豆| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影| 国产淫片久久久久久久久 | 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 国产成+人综合+亚洲专区| 身体一侧抽搐| 欧美在线黄色| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 欧美成人a在线观看| 97超级碰碰碰精品色视频在线观看| 国产久久久一区二区三区| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 国产高潮美女av| 在线观看一区二区三区| 90打野战视频偷拍视频| 久久久色成人| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 97人妻精品一区二区三区麻豆| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 亚洲国产色片| 亚洲在线观看片| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽| 一a级毛片在线观看| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 禁无遮挡网站| 欧美成人免费av一区二区三区| 欧美潮喷喷水| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 午夜免费成人在线视频| 国产成年人精品一区二区| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 51国产日韩欧美| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 美女大奶头视频| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 18美女黄网站色大片免费观看| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 在线播放国产精品三级| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 精品午夜福利在线看| 夜夜爽天天搞| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看 | 国产不卡一卡二| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 波多野结衣高清作品| 嫩草影院入口| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 免费观看精品视频网站| 少妇高潮的动态图| 国产一区二区三区视频了| ponron亚洲| 国产高清激情床上av| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 我要搜黄色片| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 成人国产综合亚洲| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 日本 av在线| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站 | 国产av麻豆久久久久久久| 久久精品91蜜桃| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 十八禁人妻一区二区| 在线播放国产精品三级| 又黄又爽又免费观看的视频| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 亚洲在线自拍视频| av天堂中文字幕网| 久久精品夜夜夜夜夜久久蜜豆| 一区二区三区四区激情视频 | 人妻久久中文字幕网| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 国产色婷婷99| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 真实男女啪啪啪动态图| 少妇高潮的动态图| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| 亚洲成人久久爱视频| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 精品久久久久久成人av| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 人人妻人人澡欧美一区二区| 嫩草影院精品99| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 日日夜夜操网爽| 身体一侧抽搐| 美女黄网站色视频| 国模一区二区三区四区视频| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 欧美bdsm另类| 女人十人毛片免费观看3o分钟| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 欧美激情在线99| 内地一区二区视频在线| 亚洲av二区三区四区| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 欧美zozozo另类| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 成年版毛片免费区| 少妇丰满av| 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 在线播放国产精品三级| 身体一侧抽搐| 久久久久久久久大av| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 窝窝影院91人妻| 97碰自拍视频| av在线天堂中文字幕| 欧美黄色淫秽网站| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 成人午夜高清在线视频| 亚洲男人的天堂狠狠| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 久久久久久久久大av| 欧美乱妇无乱码| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 国产美女午夜福利| 国产精品不卡视频一区二区 | 一级作爱视频免费观看| 成人精品一区二区免费| 日本与韩国留学比较| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 午夜福利欧美成人| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| av黄色大香蕉| 久久精品91蜜桃| 国产一区二区在线av高清观看| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区 | 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类 | 中文资源天堂在线| 亚洲国产精品999在线| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 国产大屁股一区二区在线视频| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 亚洲av成人av| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 国产午夜精品论理片| 日韩中字成人| 国模一区二区三区四区视频| 老女人水多毛片| 91字幕亚洲| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 在线观看66精品国产| 亚洲av免费在线观看| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 欧美乱色亚洲激情| 国产免费av片在线观看野外av| 俺也久久电影网| 欧美潮喷喷水| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| 97热精品久久久久久| 日韩大尺度精品在线看网址| 亚洲精品在线观看二区| 69人妻影院| 国产高清三级在线| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 一级av片app| .国产精品久久| 色哟哟·www| 日本撒尿小便嘘嘘汇集6| 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 午夜激情欧美在线| 国产探花极品一区二区| 免费av毛片视频| 一级作爱视频免费观看| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看| 成人av在线播放网站| 色5月婷婷丁香| 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 简卡轻食公司| 亚洲最大成人中文| 欧美午夜高清在线| av黄色大香蕉| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 一二三四社区在线视频社区8| 久久久久性生活片| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| av天堂在线播放| 亚洲五月天丁香| 成人欧美大片| 国产不卡一卡二| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 欧美日本视频| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 久久中文看片网| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 成年版毛片免费区| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 中文字幕免费在线视频6| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 午夜福利18| 美女cb高潮喷水在线观看| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看 | 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 全区人妻精品视频| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 久久人妻av系列| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 男女视频在线观看网站免费| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 午夜福利在线在线| 精品久久久久久久末码| 看片在线看免费视频| eeuss影院久久| 一本一本综合久久| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| 亚洲精品色激情综合| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| h日本视频在线播放| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 日本黄大片高清| 一区二区三区四区激情视频 | 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 我的老师免费观看完整版| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 国产精品野战在线观看| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| bbb黄色大片| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| a级毛片a级免费在线| 黄色丝袜av网址大全| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 日韩欧美精品免费久久 | 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 在线看三级毛片| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 久久久精品欧美日韩精品| 欧美国产日韩亚洲一区| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 一本一本综合久久| 免费看光身美女| 97超视频在线观看视频| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区| av在线蜜桃| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 99久久99久久久精品蜜桃| 97超视频在线观看视频| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 色5月婷婷丁香| 亚洲无线在线观看| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 中文字幕av成人在线电影| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 国产在线男女| 国产野战对白在线观看| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区 | 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 成人特级av手机在线观看| 欧美成狂野欧美在线观看| 亚洲av成人av| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 国产精品久久久久久久电影| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 久久伊人香网站| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 亚洲不卡免费看| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类 | 午夜免费成人在线视频| 老司机午夜十八禁免费视频| 两个人的视频大全免费| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 91久久精品电影网| 日韩有码中文字幕| 日韩免费av在线播放| 国产亚洲精品久久久com| .国产精品久久| 嫩草影院入口| 网址你懂的国产日韩在线| 哪里可以看免费的av片| 免费黄网站久久成人精品 | 久久99热6这里只有精品| 久久久久亚洲av毛片大全| 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| 热99re8久久精品国产| 好男人电影高清在线观看| 很黄的视频免费| 亚洲成人精品中文字幕电影| 色综合欧美亚洲国产小说| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 如何舔出高潮| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件 | 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 成年免费大片在线观看| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区 | 久久性视频一级片| 三级男女做爰猛烈吃奶摸视频| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 亚洲成av人片免费观看| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 午夜福利视频1000在线观看| 三级国产精品欧美在线观看| 亚洲国产色片| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 99久久久亚洲精品蜜臀av| 成人无遮挡网站| 日本熟妇午夜| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 好看av亚洲va欧美ⅴa在| 极品教师在线免费播放| 中文字幕av在线有码专区| 变态另类丝袜制服| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 88av欧美| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 国产aⅴ精品一区二区三区波| 国产一区二区在线观看日韩| 一级av片app| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 在线免费观看不下载黄p国产 | 在线播放无遮挡| 欧美性猛交黑人性爽| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 床上黄色一级片| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 精品午夜福利在线看| 观看免费一级毛片| 97超视频在线观看视频| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 黄片小视频在线播放| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 热99在线观看视频| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看 | 淫妇啪啪啪对白视频| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看 | 99热精品在线国产| 天堂√8在线中文| 窝窝影院91人妻| 成年女人永久免费观看视频| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人| 天堂√8在线中文| 日日夜夜操网爽| 国产国拍精品亚洲av在线观看| 午夜精品一区二区三区免费看| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| av在线老鸭窝| 亚洲av美国av| 怎么达到女性高潮| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 亚洲av.av天堂| 老女人水多毛片| 亚洲国产欧洲综合997久久,| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 女生性感内裤真人,穿戴方法视频| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 欧美高清成人免费视频www| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图 | 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 91狼人影院| 一夜夜www| 激情在线观看视频在线高清| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| a在线观看视频网站| 身体一侧抽搐| 国产成人av教育| 免费看a级黄色片| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 少妇的逼好多水| 国产在线男女| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 欧美zozozo另类| 99视频精品全部免费 在线| 青草久久国产| 嫩草影视91久久| 色视频www国产| 欧美bdsm另类| 级片在线观看| 亚洲内射少妇av| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 少妇高潮的动态图| a在线观看视频网站| 91久久精品电影网| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 美女免费视频网站| 在线播放国产精品三级| www.999成人在线观看| 午夜视频国产福利| 欧美性猛交╳xxx乱大交人| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| 免费搜索国产男女视频| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 亚洲最大成人手机在线| ponron亚洲| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索| 一a级毛片在线观看| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 国产精品三级大全| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 欧美成人a在线观看|