IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/cysrev/v171y2025ics0190740925000490.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Families’ perspectives on the impact of signs of safety in child protection services through the lens of self-determination theory

Author

Listed:
  • De Clercq, L.
  • Meulewaeter, F.
  • Rowaert, S.
  • Decoene, S.
  • Caffrey, L.
  • Caslor, M.
  • Vandevelde, S.
  • Vanderplasschen, W.

Abstract

The Signs of Safety (SofS) approach has been designed as a strengths- and solution-oriented approach for professional care providers to support families and children referred to Child Protection Services (CPS). Although SofS has been implemented worldwide within statutory and non-statutory child protection practices, research from the perspective of families that evidences the approach’s impact is currently lacking. As previous research has called for more theory-driven impact studies, this study applies Self-Determination Theory (SDT) as a framework to better understand how SofS enables families to experience ‘autonomous’ motivation rather than ‘controlled’ motivation by supporting basic human needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competence. Sixteen parents, minors, and network members from five case studies were interviewed through semi-structured interviews about their experiences with their SofS trajectory in Flanders, Belgium. The results demonstrate that by leveraging SDT and integrating it with the principles of SofS, practice workers can establish a supportive environment that respects family autonomy, promotes collaboration, and encourages self-endorsed goals, ultimately enhancing the safety and well-being of children and families involved in CPS.

Suggested Citation

  • De Clercq, L. & Meulewaeter, F. & Rowaert, S. & Decoene, S. & Caffrey, L. & Caslor, M. & Vandevelde, S. & Vanderplasschen, W., 2025. "Families’ perspectives on the impact of signs of safety in child protection services through the lens of self-determination theory," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:171:y:2025:i:c:s0190740925000490
    DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2025.108166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740925000490
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.childyouth.2025.108166?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keddell, Emily, 2014. "Theorising the signs of safety approach to child protection social work: Positioning, codes and power," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(P1), pages 70-77.
    2. Furrer, Carrie J. & Rodgers, Angela C. & Cooper, Christine & Rockhill, Anna & Lauzus, Nicole, 2023. "Creating conditions that encourage youth engagement in family child welfare case planning meetings: A youth perspective," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    3. Salveron, Mary & Bromfield, Leah & Kirika, Clara & Simmons, Jane & Murphy, Terry & Turnell, Andrew, 2015. "‘Changing the way we do child protection’: The implementation of Signs of Safety® within the Western Australia Department for Child Protection and Family Support," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 126-139.
    4. Caffrey, Louise & Browne, Freda, 2023. "The challenge of implementation in complex, adaptive child welfare systems: A realist synthesis of signs of safety," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    5. Reekers, Sari E. & Dijkstra, Sharon & Stams, Geert Jan J.M. & Asscher, Jessica J. & Creemers, Hanneke E., 2018. "Signs of effectiveness of signs of safety? – A pilot study," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 177-184.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caffrey, Louise & Browne, Freda, 2023. "The challenge of implementation in complex, adaptive child welfare systems: A realist synthesis of signs of safety," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    2. Saar-Heiman, Yuval, 2023. "Power with and power over: Social workers’ reflections on their use of power when talking with parents about child welfare concerns," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    3. Mason, Robin & Du Mont, Janice & Paterson, Maeve & Hyman, Ilene, 2018. "Experiences of child protection workers in collaborating with adult mental health providers: An exploratory study from Ontario, Canada," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 271-276.
    4. Albers, Bianca & Mildon, Robyn & Lyon, Aaron R. & Shlonsky, Aron, 2017. "Implementation frameworks in child, youth and family services – Results from a scoping review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 101-116.
    5. O'Leary, Donna & Christie, Alistair & Perry, Ivan J. & Khashan, Ali S, 2024. "Determinants of receiving child protection and welfare services following initial assessment: A cross-sectional study from the Republic of Ireland," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    6. Emily Keddell, 2014. "Current Debates on Variability in Child Welfare Decision-Making: A Selected Literature Review," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-25, November.
    7. Caffrey, Louise & Brady, Eavan & Keegan, Orla & Dunne, Siobhán & Sheaf, Greg & Holt, Stephanie & Gilligan, Robbie, 2024. "Children’s experiences of Signs of Safety: A scoping review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    8. Rijbroek, Brigit & Strating, Mathilde M.H. & Huijsman, Robbert, 2017. "Implementation of a solution based approach for child protection: A professionals' perspective," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 337-346.
    9. Keddell, Emily & Hyslop, Ian, 2018. "Role type, risk perceptions and judgements in child welfare: A mixed methods vignette study," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 130-139.
    10. Caroline McGregor & Carmel Devaney, 2020. "A Framework to Inform Protective Support and Supportive Protection in Child Protection and Welfare Practice and Supervision," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, April.
    11. Packard, Thomas, 2017. "Tactics for successful organizational change in a youth and family services agency," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 129-138.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:171:y:2025:i:c:s0190740925000490. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.