It’s time to talk about Australia’s less obvious housing crisis. Most homes available to buy and rent aren’t family-focused and hinder a family’s ability to flourish.
A good way to know a home isn’t pro-family is if it’s listed for sale as an investment property, as suitable for downsizers or for fifo workers, or if the advertisement fails to mention the word family at all.
The post-war dream of a family home on a quarter-acre block is getting harder to find in Australia’s major cities and surrounding suburbs. It’s true that every family has different needs but certain principles still pertain to building a home fit for the average Australian family.
What makes a house suitable for a family? Here are a few points to consider.
First, is there space for future family members? Is there a bathtub for a baby or toddler? Back in the day, our grandparents had bathtubs. Or do developers expect an 8-month-old to take a shower?
Second, is there space outside for the kids to play? Calling a paved courtyard a backyard isn’t going to work for families who want their kids to do something other than become screen junkies. Misnomering backyards is a by-product of the original owner who subdivided his property so many times, Zeno himself would be paradoxically impressed.
Third, is there storage? Storage is a casualty of lot subdivision and is so incredibly sparse in many homes that a bedroom often doubles as a storeroom. There is only so much downsizing a family with children can do. The truth about minimalism is that it usually appeals to the childless particularly those who lead a privileged life and may have only a few objets but have lots of space to display them.
Fourth, would a baby’s cot fit in the main bedroom with room to walk around the bed or is the ‘master’ bedroom only fit for a master?
Fifth, is there a place for a dishwasher either in the kitchen or laundry? Not having a dishwasher might be tolerable for blokes sharing a flat, but is less favourable for a family.
Sixth, is the house proximate to essential services and basic infrastructure and how far is it from jobs and schools? Is the family who lives in it going to be forced to spend a king’s ransom on petrol?
At least they have a roof over their heads say those individuals who invest in real estate for tax breaks and negative gearing. This is like saying people should be happy even if all they have to eat is lollies. A person subsisting on a diet of lollies can’t flourish. Saying a family should be happy to live in any dwelling ignores the fact that Australian families need more than just a roof and four walls.
What happens when a family is living in a house that is too small, with no storage or outdoor space, is cut off from public transport and services, and is under extreme financial stress from rocketing interest rates, rampant inflation or soaring rental costs? Is that family set up to flourish or fail?
Is it too much to ask that businesses and governments consider family-focused housing when contracting builders to supply houses for the next generation of Australian families?
