Suchergebnisse

AbstractWhen concerns about child safety and wellbeing are substantiated, decisions are made in the context of the options available—child(ren) remaining supported within family, short‐term removal with a plan for return home when parental issues are addressed, or permanent care placement. In New Zealand, families facing possible removal experience multiple challenges including poverty, family violence, parental mental health and substance abuse issues and historical and inter‐generational trauma. Lack of resources to facilitate the intensive intervention needed to address such complexity increases the risk that removal is seen as the only way to ensure safety. Criticism of increasing removal rates for young children with significant over‐representation of indigenous children has led to allocation of funding to establish Intensive Intervention services. New Zealand has a history of importing 'evidence‐based' models from other countries. A review of what is currently known about intensive intervention with families where there is risk of a child removal was undertaken to explore the challenges that might arise in our bi‐ and multi‐cultural environment. Critical factors for effective intervention are discussed before concluding with consideration of implications for other countries with histories of colonization and culturally diverse populations.

The question in the title is addressed by exploring the challenges inherent in providing care for children who are unable to live with their birth families. It is argued that failure to interrogate the assumptions underlying traditional foster care and take account of changes in family structure and socioeconomic circumstances has created a situation in which children in care and their care givers are being set up to fail. Changes needed to address this are outlined.

AbstractNew Zealand is undergoing major change in service delivery to children and families. A new Ministry for Children Oranga Tamariki has been established to oversee 5 work streams, one of which provides intensive intervention with families requiring a statutory response to child protection concerns. The government minister responsible promised that the service would be child‐centred and trauma‐informed. To date, these terms remain undefined, and there is no shared understanding of their meaning. Practice frameworks to support the work of the new ministry are still being developed, creating something of a vacuum in the meantime. The focus of this paper is the challenge of implementing trauma‐informed practice in the child protection service provided by the Intensive Intervention work stream. Limited research or commentary on trauma‐informed practice in this context currently exists. Drawing on the relevant available literature, the concept and its application in child protection social work is explored. An ecological framework is used to discuss the changes needed to achieve this. Particular attention is paid to the impact of historical trauma for indigenous people due to New Zealand's colonial history and their over‐representation in care and protection services.

This paper questions the extent to which New Zealand children have benefited from New Right economic policies and argues that the invisibility of children, the role of public concern about children and the social construction of childhood are factors which have facilitated implementation of these changes. Attention is drawn to the ways in which the personal and the political spheres intersect in children's lives. Rather than focusing on either the micro level of intervention in the lives of individual children or the macro level of societal change it is argued that the dualism itself must be transcended in order to move forward from the current position. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This article provides an outline of the early development of care and protection in Australia and New Zealand as a backdrop to an overview of child protection systems and policies and the current child protection profile in both countries. Key issues that have become the focus of policy reform are canvassed and legislative and policy initiatives to promote child safety as well as strengthen families are elaborated. An overview of trends in relation to out of home care, including routes into care, care arrangements and permanency policies is provided. The article profiles selected research studies from Australia focusing on outcomes of care: stability of care, mental health and educational outcomes of looked after children, abuse in care, and routes out of care through reunification and aging out. Other issues treated are the overrepresentation of indigenous children in care systems in both countries and the challenges of maintaining cultural connections. The article concludes with a brief comparative analysis identifying similarities and differences in child welfare systems in both countries. ; Peer Reviewed