Parental problems, case plan requirements, and service targeting in child welfare reunification
Only about half of parents attempting to reunify with their children in foster care succeed in their efforts. Parents are ordered by the court to use treatment services in order to resolve their problems. These treatment services thus play a critical role in reunification, and in fact the use of services appropriately matched to parents' problems has been found to be associated with a greater likelihood of reunification. However, there is little in the literature regarding the specific requirements of reunification case plans, and whether they are accurately targeted at reunifying parents' problems. This mostly descriptive study uses case file data to examine the relationship between parental problems and case plan requirements for a sample of parents reunifying with their children in one large urban California county. Findings show that most reunifying parents had multiple problems, and were required to attend approximately 8 service events per week. There was a positive correlation between the total number of concerns (treatment problems and life challenges) and required weekly service events. While 85% of parents were ordered treatment services for all their identified problems, over 30% were ordered services targeting problems they were not known to have. Overall, 58% of parents were ordered both all appropriate and only appropriate services. Implications for policy and practice are discussed, including the need for models of service delivery that limit the burden of accessing multiple service locations for reunifying parents.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Bagdasaryan, Sofya, 2005. "Evaluating family preservation services: Reframing the question of effectiveness," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 615-635, June.
- Marcenko, Maureen O. & Lyons, Sandra J. & Courtney, Mark, 2011. "Mothers' experiences, resources and needs: The context for reunification," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 431-438, March.
- Choi, Sam & Ryan, Joseph P., 2007. "Co-occurring problems for substance abusing mothers in child welfare: Matching services to improve family reunification," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 1395-1410, November.
- Green, Beth L. & Rockhill, Anna & Furrer, Carrie, 2007. "Does substance abuse treatment make a difference for child welfare case outcomes? A statewide longitudinal analysis," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 460-473, April.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:34:y:2012:i:10:p:2131-2138. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.