Search

The Family Group Conference (FGC) is grounded in a rights‐based framework, whereby children and their families have the right and responsibility to be primary decision‐makers when child protection issues arise, and the statutory agency has the responsibility to convene the entitled members of the family network to lead the decision‐making. A distinct core component of FGC—private family time (PFT)—allows families to discuss the information and formulate their responses and plans privately during conferencing. This paper describes how a large child welfare agency in the United States adapted PFT in two ways: (1) including a parent advocate (PA) and (2) abbreviating the amount of time allowed for this discussion. Given the lack of empirical research on the PFT component, this qualitative exploratory study sought to understand the functions and perceived impacts of PA‐supported PFT during initial child protective services (CPS) conferences at which decisions of child removal or placement were being contemplated. PFT served multiple beneficial functions and impacted families in several positive ways: families gained greater awareness of safety concerns, felt empowered and confident in the preferred safety and service plan, became increasingly engaged and involved in the case decision‐making process and ultimately felt less apprehensive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the accounts given by child protection practitioners of how the current economic climate has impacted on their practice. We build our discussion on empirical findings emerging from a small but rigorous qualitative research project conducted by one of the authors. This original study examined Scottish and Finnish social workers' perceptions of their abilities to engage effectively with children and families in what many have described as an "age of austerity." It set out to explore challenges encountered in daily practice through a cross‐national comparative thematic analysis. The paper illuminates practitioners' shared reality of frontline practice in Scottish and Finnish contexts. Despite differing socio‐political environments, participating practitioners found austerity measures to impact negatively on both their professional resources and on the communities they work with. Significantly, practitioners regarded themselves as the key resource, taking individual responsibility to ensure families received a quality service. For many, austerity had resulted in greater empathy for families and awareness of the wider economic and structural impact on their lives. The increased centrality of social justice was pivotal to everyday practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]