Suchergebnisse

AbstractCitizens' opinions on child protection public policy are a key dimension of the legitimacy of a political order. We have conducted a survey vignette on a representative sample of citizens (N = 4,003) in England, Finland, Norway, and California, USA. The findings show that citizens' opinions are clearly in favour of adoption (75%) rather than long‐term foster care (25%). Context may partly explain the findings, as the responses of the majority of Anglo‐American respondents are in line with practice in their countries but for the Nordic respondents, there is a substantial discrepancy between citizens' opinions and on‐going child protection practices.

The English language term 'permanence' is increasingly used in high income countries as a 'short-hand' translation for a complex set of aims around providing stability and family membership for children who need child welfare services and out-of-home care. From a scrutiny of legislative provisions, court judgments, government documents and a public opinion survey on child placement options, the paper draws out similarities and differences in understandings of the place of 'permanence' within the child welfare discourse in Norway and England. The main differences are that in England the components of permanence are explicitly set out in legislation, statutory guidance and advisory documents whilst in Norway the terms 'stability' and 'continuity' are used in a more limited number of policy documents in the context of a wide array of services available for children and families. The paper then draws on these sources, and on administrative data on children in care, to tease out possible explanations for the similarities and differences identified. We hypothesise that both long-standing policies and recent changes can be explained by differences in public and political understandings of child welfare and the balance between universal services and those targeted on parents and children identified as vulnerable and in need of specialist services. ; publishedVersion

The English language term 'permanence' is increasingly used in high income countries as a 'short-hand' translation for a complex set of aims around providing stability and family membership for children who need child welfare services and out-of-home care. From a scrutiny of legislative provisions, court judgments, government documents and a public opinion survey on child placement options, the paper draws out similarities and differences in understandings of the place of 'permanence' within the child welfare discourse in Norway and England. The main differences are that in England the components of permanence are explicitly set out in legislation, statutory guidance and advisory documents whilst in Norway the terms 'stability' and 'continuity' are used in a more limited number of policy documents in the context of a wide array of services available for children and families. The paper then draws on these sources, and on administrative data on children in care, to tease out possible explanations for the similarities and differences identified. We hypothesise that both long-standing policies and recent changes can be explained by differences in public and political understandings of child welfare and the balance between universal services and those targeted on parents and children identified as vulnerable and in need of specialist services.

The use of residential placements for children needing out‐of‐home care remains controversial. This article considers the discourse of 'residential' and 'institutional' care before describing, mainly through administrative data sources, the wide variations in group‐care usage in different jurisdictions. In some countries, its use is minimal, with foster care, kinship care and in some cases, adoption being the preferred options. This is not so in other countries where a high percentage of children in care are in residential placements. There is also diversity in the type of residential services, ranging from small group homes to large institutions. The challenges inherent in making process and outcome comparisons across national boundaries are explored. The authors concur with those who argue for more systematic ways of describing and analysing the aims and characteristics of residential settings. Only then can meaningful comparisons be made between outcomes from group‐care regimes in different jurisdictions.

June Thoburn and Gillian Schofield demonstrate how the development of the foster care service over the last 30 years reveals BAAF's varied points of engagement with policy and practice, which have increasingly helped to shape the foster care agenda.

ABSTRACTThis paper presents findings from a prospective longitudinal study which set out to track the progress of 105 children and young people newly identified as having suffered, or being likely to suffer, significant harm through maltreatment or neglect. Baseline data were collected on these children in four English social services departments. Descriptive data on the services and child outcome data were analysed on all the children between 12 and 18 months later, and on 77 of the young people 8–9 years after concerns were first identified. Forty per cent of the children stayed at home with a parent throughout, while the majority of children experienced either some or considerable disruption to their lives. Fifty‐seven per cent experienced further maltreatment or neglect. Some children appear to have made good progress in spite of repeated moves, disruption and re‐abuse. The paper examines the pattern of services to children and parents. Factors are explored which appeared to either help or hinder the children's capacity to deal with the stresses and adversities faced over the 8 years. Implications for policy and practice are explored which may be more likely to promote positive outcomes for these high‐risk children.

As governments increasingly search globally for strategies to improve child welfare outcomes, it is vital to consider how policies and programs developed in other countries are likely to suit local conditions. Routinely collected child welfare administrative data can provide contextual information for cross-national comparisons. This article examines out-of-home care in Australia compared to other developed countries, and explores possible explanations for differences in patterns and trends. In doing so, it also examines the similarities and differences between NSW, Victoria and Queensland. It is argued that a sound understanding of how out-of-home care is used, the profile of children in care and the influences on data can assist policy makers to match proposed solutions to clearly understood current problems. The imperative is to plan and implement policies and programs that locate out-of-home care within a range of child welfare services that meet the diverse needs of children and families within local contexts.

ABSTRACTThis paper reviews the research on the referral of minority ethnic children to child and family social work teams because of child protection concerns. Specifically, it focuses on those studies that have researched the referral stage of the child 'in need' and child protection systems, and explored differences in patterns of referral between the main ethnic groups that make up the UK population.

ABSTRACTThis paper considers some of the available published research on family support services for minority ethnic families. In addressing this aspect of social work with minority ethnic families, we seek to make a contribution to the knowledge base of practitioners. The paper begins with an overview of what is known about family support services for particular minority ethnic groups, before exploring three specific areas: family centres, a home visiting service, and family group conferences. The paper finally examines what research says about the qualities sought in social workers by minority ethnic parents.

In this article Chris Beckett and June Thoburn look at an innovative fostering project in Shanghai, which places children from a large children's institution. They consider placement outcomes for 220 children placed over a two-year period. A number of variables are discussed which might impact on placement outcomes, including age, gender, level of disability, length of time spent in the institution and age at time of placement. The length of time spent in institutional care and age at placement were found to be predictors of the placements breaking down during the first few years after placement. Younger children moved quickly into foster homes were most likely to settle there successfully. This finding is in accord with other studies that have found that early institutional care can have adverse long-term consequences for development. This pattern, it is suggested, does not necessarily reflect poor physical care within the institution. It may simply be a consequence of the fact that an environment of this kind cannot provide the kinds of relationships which are necessary for optimal development. The authors believe that looking at placement outcomes for projects of this kind provides a valuable opportunity to learn more about children's vulnerabilities and about the kinds of post-placement support which are needed.