Search

Family reunification is an area of high policy importance for child protection systems. The safe return of children from out‐of‐home care to their biological parents or relatives and long‐term family preservation can potentially mitigate the subsequent detrimental effects of separating children from their families. In this paper we describe one type of family for whom reunification was considered; namely, families who have been affected by intergenerational trauma. To assist families affected by intergenerational trauma and abuse requires an understanding of the mechanisms and processes that maintain intergenerational trauma and how these might inform therapeutic approaches for working with children and their families. This paper utilises case studies to illustrate the use of the Adult Exploration of Attachment Interview (AEAI) as part of a broader therapeutic reunification program in an Australian state. The AEAI focuses on supporting parents to become aware of the impact of previous experiences in their childhood; the mitigation of feelings of shame, self‐blame, and inadequacy by helping the parent confront the negative experiences of the past. The aim is to assist the parent to recognise the significance of the past, to consolidate their strengths, and to develop more nurturing relationships with their children. Case illustrations demonstrate that this therapy was a component in addressing the causes of behaviour and psychological distress that had been barriers to reunification from care in two families. This was achieved through a process of reflection and self‐awareness, rather than one focused on guilt or shame, with the therapist there to help verbalise and articulate what otherwise might have been hidden or implicit processes. In both cases, this awareness was used to help reframe the parent–child relationship and led to observable behavioural changes in parenting practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Systemic disadvantage may contribute to child removal for parents with AOD issues (84 characters) • Conflicting demands from government agencies can act as a barrier to reunification (85 characters) • Insecure housing and limited social support may inhibit family reunification (79 characters) • Residential substance use rehabilitation can support parent/child reunification (82 characters) • Interviews reveal that poverty and trauma can contribute to parents' substance use (85 characters) The challenges and experiences associated with child removal and reunification from the perspective of mothers experiencing substance-related harms is under-researched in Australia. Our qualitative study employed a socio-ecological model to better understand the background to child removal, and perceived barriers and facilitators to achieving reunification of mother and child. In-depth interviews were conducted with 16 women, 8 of whom self-identified as Australian First Nations People. At the time of the interviews, these women were either living in substance use rehabilitation facilities, their own home or with relatives. Findings highlighted a history of complex disadvantage and trauma among the women, along with a deep and enduring commitment to their children. Key barriers to reunification included limited social support networks, insecure housing, and challenges in meeting conflicting requirements from the child protection, social welfare and justice systems. An important facilitator to reunification was access to a residential substance use rehabilitation facility that offered holistic wrap-around services with links to community support. This study highlights the inadequacy of individual approaches focused on parents' substance use and emphasises the need to address significant structural disadvantages that underpin increasing numbers of children being placed in government mandated care in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Section 90 of the NSW Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 No 157 refers to an Application for rescission or variation of final Care Orders for children who have previously been removed from the family home and placed into permanent care. The Act provides specific criteria for considering the restoration of a child to their family. These criteria provided a framework to evaluate how well the current literature addressed the factors that impact on the outcomes for children after final Care Orders have been made. A key difference between children in temporary care and those under final Care Orders is the length of time they have been in care at the time of the application. This paper's analysis identified length of time in care, issues related to attachment between parent and child, parenting capacity, and placement stability as key factors for determining the suitability of restoring children to their families. Considerable literature referred to children in temporary care arrangements, highlighting a need for further research to specifically evaluate the short- and long-term impact when final Care Orders are varied or rescinded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background An estimated 60–70% of Australian children in out of home care have a parent with a substance use disorder (SUD). The assessment of a parent's history and needs and the design of supportive interventions, particularly for mothers who are often the primary carers of children, are important considerations in deciding whether or not family reunification is desirable and possible. It is not clear from the research how the needs of families can be best met. There are no systematic reviews that provide evidence to inform the development of preventative and remedial interventions and related policy options. We undertook a systematic review to examine maternal characteristics and program features that facilitate or pose a barrier to mother–child reunification in contexts where mothers have a SUD. Methods A structured search of nine databases was undertaken to identify peer reviewed literature in English between 2004 and 2014 and examine factors that influenced mother–child reunification in mothers with SUD. We employed a narrative synthesis design to analyse the findings sections of all papers as the methods of the various studies did not permit the pooling of data. Results A total of 11 studies were included in this review. Findings show that factors such as timeliness of treatment entry, treatment completion and the receipt of matched services, and programs that provided a greater level of integrated care are positively related to reunification. The presence of a mental health disorder, use of opiates and having a greater number of children were barriers to reunification. Conclusion Women with SUD who have a child in out of home care appear to have multiple unmet needs. Accessible, stigma free and comprehensive integrated care services, as well as greater access to primary health care that address social and medical issues must be considered to improve the physical and psycho-social outcomes of these women and their children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Whilst child protection systems are concerned with removal of children from their families in the interests of safety, the capacity of child welfare systems to return children safely to their families of origin is of central importance. The multidimensional standardised assessment tool, the North Carolina Family Assessment Scale—Reunification (NCFAS-R) was used by practitioners to assess family strengths and needs in case planning and reunification decision making. The current paper examined (1) whether NCFAS-R domain ratings at intake and closure differ by characteristics of parents and children; and (2) whether reunification is predicted by NCFAS-R score at closure. The study sample consists of 145 children aged 0–12years from 84 families, who presented at Barnardos temporary care services in two metropolitan areas in Australia. This excludes children who had missing values on NCFAS-R or reunification outcome. Participants continuously entered the study over the four year study period, the study window being 18months since intake. Ordinary least squared (OLS) regression was used to examine whether NCFAS-R scores at intake and closure were predicted by demographic variables, primary reason in care, and placement circumstance. To examine the relationship between NCFAS-R scores at closure and reunification outcome, a logistic regression model was used. At intake, the average score was highest for the Child Well-Being domain and lowest for the Parental Capabilities domain. NCFAS-R scores were increased at closure on all domains, with the biggest improvement on the domains of Family Safety and Child Well-Being. At intake, NCFAS-R scores did not differ significantly by independent variables examined except for the Child Well-Being domain. Children who were placed with their siblings displayed 0.45 points higher scores on the Child Well-Being domain. At closure, NCFAS-R scores differed significantly by some family variables and a placement variable. In general, mothers being 25years or younger, mothers having Year 11 or a higher level of education, or children being placed with their siblings were significantly associated with higher scores on various NCFAS-R domains at closure. Overall NCFAS-R scores at closure significantly predicted reunification with parents or kin. One unit increase in overall NCFAS-R score at closure increased the odds of reunification by a factor of 8.39. Findings contribute to an evolving evidence base on decision making and facilitating reunification outcomes for children and families. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Efforts to prevent child maltreatment and its recurrence in infancy and early childhood are critical to disrupting pathways to poor physical and mental health and interpersonal relationships across the life course. The Home Parenting Education and Support (HoPES) program is an intensive 8-week home-visiting intervention for families of infants and young children (0–4 years) receiving child protection services or welfare services. The aims of this feasibility study were to: (a) explore parents' and clinicians' perceptions of the outcomes related to participation in HoPES, and (b) obtain preliminary data about potential intervention outcomes related to parent-child interactions, parent mental health, and parenting self-efficacy. HoPES was delivered to 30 families by a child and family health service. Seven mothers and eight HoPES clinicians also participated in qualitative interviews. A mixed-methods evaluation was conducted incorporating qualitative interviews and self-report pre-post intervention data was conducted. Interviews with mothers identified perceived benefits for parent mental health and wellbeing, parenting, and relationships with children. This was further supported by clinician interviews and by the analysis of pre-post assessment data which revealed moderate to large decreases in maternal stress (d = 0.35) and increases in parental self-efficacy (0.76). The findings of this study have important implications for further development of HoPES, and the design of a rigorous evaluation in next stage of evaluation research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]