Contact between birth parents and children in kinship care in a sample from Spain

Within the context of kinship care, the main objectives of this work are to study the characteristics of contact between foster children and their birth parents, and their relationship with key variables of fostering, the children and their kinship caregivers. The sample included 189 children from Spain and their kinship families. A semi‐structured placement interview and two scales relating to the child–caregiver relationship and child's psychological adjustment were used with the kinship families. The results revealed a significant percentage of foster children who had no family contact. Various visit types, frequencies and durations were described. Kinship care with contact, compared with placements without contact, was frequently characterized by the absence of professional supervision, and an affectionate child–caregiver relationship; moreover, children with contact were perceived to have fewer serious behaviour and socio‐emotional problems and a greater probability of family reunification. The regression analysis showed that the main predictors for how caregivers assessed contact were the children's emotional reaction during visits and the quality of the relationship between the kinship families and the birth parents. These results suggest the need for further research about contact, which will certainly have a major impact on professional intervention with these families.     

Secrecy and Openness in Adoption: An Historical Perspective

The issue of whether there should be continuing contact between those who are adopted and their birth relatives is one of the most contentious issues in current adoption practice (see for example DoH, 1993; McWhinnie and Smith 1994). The view traditionally taken is that adoption in England and Wales has been secret since its legal origins in 1926 and any moves to more fully disclosed information and indeed contact between the parties in adoption is a recent development (see for example DoH 1992). This article considers the history of birth family contact and access to records in adoption from 1926 to the 1958 Adoption Act and examines the factors that favoured the development of closed models of practice where there was no contact between the parties and records became secret. In doing so it challenges the accepted view that adoption has always provided for secrecy in England and Wales and establishes that both the thinking of policy makers and the legislation itself until 1949 provided for more open forms of adoption than we enjoy today. Secrecy, it is claimed, developed as a consequence of a collusion between professionals and the judiciary which disregarded the legal rights of birth parents and failed to respect their entitlement to a proper say in the decisions about the future of their children.     

Reuniting Children with their Families: Reconsidering the Evidence on Timing, Contact and Outcomes

This paper discusses key issues emerging from a review of theliterature on reuniting children in public care with their families,examining the basis for common assumptions about reunification.It focuses on three important issues: the evidence on the timingof discharge, the evidence on parental contact and the viewthat reunion is necessarily a positive outcome for children.Reviewing the research on the links between time in care andthe probability of reunification, it argues that this researchevidence has sometimes been misinterpreted. This has also beenthe case in relation to studies of the links between contactand reunification. The paper then presents the limited evidenceon the outcomes of reunification, including evidence on re-entry,re-abuse and psychosocial outcomes, arguing that such evidenceas exists clearly indicates a need for caution when returningabused or neglected children to their families. It is arguedthat greater attention to assessment, planning and follow-upsupport is needed if children are to be successfully reunitedwith their families and that more research is needed into theoutcomes of reunification.     

Long‐term foster care or adoption? The evidence examined

Based on an examination of the research literature, this paper contrasts six variables connected with the outcome of adoption and long‐term fostering. It provides some answers to the question often being asked by policy makers and family placement workers, as well as judges, about the relative merits and limitations of these two forms of substitute parenting for children who cannot return to live with their birth families. Because of the type of child currently adopted or fostered, breakdown rates by themselves are increasingly an unreliable outcome measure. The main defining difference found between these two forms of substitute parenting appears to be the higher levels of emotional security, sense of belonging and general well‐being expressed by those growing up as adopted compared with those fostered long term. However, for reasons outlined in the paper, long‐term fostering still has a definite place for a range of children who require long‐term plans.     

Organizational support for evidence-based practice within child and family social work: a collaborative study

Research in Practice works in collaboration with over 50 English local authorities and voluntary childcare organizations, to explore new and dynamic ways to increase the use of quality evidence to improve services to children and families. One Research in Practice initiative was a two‐year collaborative project involving the social services departments of six local authorities. This paper reports on how the views of more than 100 professional staff involved with the provision of services to children and families have been gathered to offer insight into how evidence‐based practice can be supported or frustrated in social care organizations. The findings suggest considerable uncertainty about the nature of evidence in social care and its validity in relation to decision‐making, policy and planning. Mechanisms essential for the dissemination, implementation and adoption of research messages are underdeveloped and tensions exist around the explicit use of research evidence within reports and reviews. Many practitioners and teams may be excluded from making decisions based on the best available research evidence through lack of access to internet resources and adequate information dissemination mechanisms. The paper concludes that there remain considerable areas for further debate if evidence‐based practice is to become a reality in work with children and families.     

Using concurrent planning to establish permanency for looked after young children

Many looked after children spend lengthy periods in impermanent care, and their frequent moves probably contribute to subsequent disturbed behaviour. Concurrent planning aims to reduce the number of moves and the length of time before placement in a permanent family. In this study 24 young children in three concurrent planning (CP) projects and 44 from two ‘traditional’ adoption teams were followed for 12–15 months. Records were obtained of the number of moves between households and the dates of key events before the child's permanent family placement was confirmed by the courts. The CP children moved into permanent families significantly faster and with significantly fewer previous moves than the two comparison groups. Unexpectedly, the CP children were significantly younger than the children following ‘traditional’ adoption programmes, making direct comparison impossible. Among those birth parents who were interviewed, the majority saw advantages in the CP approach. Concurrent planning carers reported high levels of personal anxiety but positive views of the advantages for the children. We conclude that CP can be used to achieve earlier permanence and fewer moves between carers for young children from selected birth families. The success of a CP team is dependent on the support of other professionals involved in determining permanent placements, based on a shared acknowledgement of the damaging effects of delay for the looked after child.     

Grief,loss, and separation: Experiences of birth children of foster carers

Previous research identifies the increased exposure of birth children of foster carers to experiences of separation, grief, and loss due to the transient nature of foster care, but little is known about how birth children manage this loss. This paper reports findings from a qualitative study that examined the retrospective experiences of 15 adult birth children of foster carers (aged between 18 and 28 years) in Ireland. Findings suggest that birth children experience grief and loss when foster children leave their families. They report experiencing a range of emotional responses such as guilt, blame, and sadness. A reluctance to discuss their emotional responses with either their parents or foster care professionals was also reported. Instead, birth children developed strategies to manage the loss, such as distancing themselves from the foster care process. The study highlights the importance of social workers and foster carers explaining to birth children why foster children are leaving and, where possible, maintaining contact between birth children and foster children. Additionally, findings indicate the need for birth children to have safe nonjudgmental spaces to discuss their emotional reactions to loss.     

Paved with Good Intentions: The Pathway to Adoption and the Costs of Delay

The thrust of UK adoption policy is to promote adoption as thebest route to a stable family life for children in the caresystem unable to return to their birth families. However, whatwe know about outcomes for adopted children comes mainly fromstudies that report on children already in placement. This articlereports on the findings of a study that examined the outcomesof a complete sample of 130 older looked after children whohad all been the subject of an adoption best interest decision.Many were successfully placed but, of those who were not, thestudy was able to identify factors that influenced placementoutcome. The negative impact on placement outcomes and the increasedfinancial costs of poor assessment and delays in planning andaction are highlighted in this paper. The reasons why delaysoccurred, the costs of those delays and the impact on childoutcomes lend support to recent government attempts to reducedelay by the introduction of timescales into the adoption process.     

Openness in adoption: Challenging the narrative of historical progress

One significant change in adoption practice that has occurred over the last four decades is the shift away from an expectation of confidentiality towards an expectation of openness in adoption. Openness is typically conceived in terms of the level of contact between adoptive and birth families following adoption or the extent to which adoption is openly discussed within the adoptive family. While these shifts in practice have generated controversy, they are largely supported by research evidence and have become a feature of contemporary adoptive family life. As a result, the narrative that has emerged in relation to openness in adoption is one of historical progress. In this paper, I argue that the lived reality of adoption is less straightforward than this narrative suggests. An analysis of the social and cultural context in which adoption operates suggests instead that the persistent feature of adoption throughout this historical period of increasing openness can be more accurately described as a state of enduring ambiguity regarding the nature of post‐adoption relationships. The paper highlights the potentially damaging consequences of overlooking this aspect of adoptive family life and comments on the role of policy in shaping openness in adoption.     

Names and naming in adoption: Birth heritage and family‐making

In this article, we consider the significance and practices of names and naming in adoption to develop understanding of the issue amongst scholars, policymakers, adoption practitioners, and adoption communities. Research on the topic of names and adoption is scarce and focused mostly on international and domestic adoptions in the United States. We draw on the research literature to critically explore names and naming in adoption through two recurrent and related themes. The first is “birth heritage,” where names, forenames especially, are shown to be important in the approach taken by adopters to their child's birth family and cultural identity. The second theme is “family‐making,” where namesaking and homogeneity of surname emerge, amongst others, as strategies to create, sustain, and display “family.” In gathering together for the first time an otherwise scattered, disparate body of research, our article showcases names and naming as illuminating distillations of key contemporary challenges experienced by families formed through adoption. We conclude our article by considering emergent gaps in existing knowledge and understanding about names, naming, and adoption that might usefully be addressed, to inform professional advice and familial decisions about names, and enhance outcomes for adoptees and their families.     

The Influence of Media and Respondent Characteristics on the Outcome of a Campaign to Recruit Host Families for Adults with Learning Disability

Family-based short break schemes depend on accessing suitablehosts. Recruitment is seen as a major challenge yet there areno published studies that examine this for adult services. Thispaper aims to redress that by describing what type of personresponded to a campaign to recruit hosts for adults with learningdisabilities, and to explore if there is a relationship between(i) the outcome of each enquiry and the respondents and (ii)outcome and how the respondents found out about the service.The study involved a retrospective examination of documentedinformation about each of forty-nine respondents, supplementedwith telephone contact. The respondents were mainly marriedwomen aged thirty to fifty, with two or more children, fromurban settings and who were employed outside the home. Mosthad heard about the service through newspapers and posters.Thirty-nine per cent applied to host. Age, family size, ageof children and location were associated with outcome. Experiencewas an important predictor of outcome. Word of mouth was themost successful means of recruiting. While broad-based advertisingis shown to attract hosts, the results can be maximized by follow-upof those who do not apply immediately. Implications for servicedelivery and research are discussed.     

Interventions to improve supervised contact visits between children in out of home care and their parents: a systematic review

Although the importance of contact between children in care and their parents, when safe, is accepted, there is limited research about supervised face‐to‐face contact. There is no literature that has systematically critiqued how supervised contact can be best delivered. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the evidence for interventions aimed at improving the quality of contact visits between parents and their children who are in out‐of‐home care. Twelve studies were included in this review. Each study was graded and assigned scores according to the presence or absence of each of seven criteria. The studies demonstrated key similarities in the types of interventions provided, although delivery varied across group, individual and educational interventions. Parents reported improved capacity to manage their emotions and parents' satisfaction with the programmes was high. Although there was a lack of large scale, methodologically rigorous studies with long‐term follow‐up, some promising findings were identified: the literature indicates individual family support and group programmes have the potential to improve parent–child relationships and the quality of contact visits. This review suggests that future studies build on current evidence by addressing their methodological limitations and evaluating interventions that can be tailored to meet the needs of individual families.     

Preparation and planning for face‐to‐face contact after adoption: the experience of adoptive parents in a UK study

Whilst there is a general international trend towards more open adoption, there is considerable variation between agencies in the extent to which they are prepared to support different forms of contact arrangements. Agencies have a pivotal role to play in decisions about contact and early planning that is integrated into the assessment and preparation of prospective adopters is fundamental to its success. This paper reports on adoptive parents' experiences of the process of preparation and planning for direct, face‐to‐face contact. During preparation, agencies were clearly getting the message across to prospective adopters about the importance of contact for the child's well being. However, insufficient attention was directed at helping adopters to anticipate their feelings towards birth relatives and their responses to the kinds of management issues that might arise after adoption. There was considerable variation in the extent to which adopters were involved in the process of planning detailed contact arrangements, and this seemed to bear relevance on the success or otherwise of subsequent contact arrangements.     

Excluding Children: Autonomy, Friendship and the Experience of the Care System

The concept of social exclusion is increasingly important in policy and research but has rarely been addressed from a child-centred perspective. Childhood is a social experience in itself, one that has its own norms and customs, and where the demands of participation and inclusion may be considerable, likewise the costs of exclusion. This paper explores the meaning and experience of social exclusion for children by focusing on a particular group of children and young people, those 'looked after' in the public care system. The sample involved children who had minimal contact with their parents, and who although not currently materially poor were vulnerable to a high future risk of experiencing poverty. They thus provided a valuable opportunity to explore some of the relational aspects of social exclusion. Using in-depth interviews to explore the meaning of friendship in their lives, the study revealed the importance of social relationships for these children, andin particular the impact of the care system on their capacity to make and sustain social networks. The findings suggest that the relational aspects of poverty are not just consequences of material poverty but can have a dynamic of their own, one that may have a particular resonance for children. This has implications not just for children in the care system, but also for children in families, where family poverty and the restricted social and economic integration of parents may also have an impact on children's capacity for developing social relationships and wider social networks.     

Children in permanent foster care in Sweden

The Swedish child welfare system has no permanency planning as we know it from, for example, the United States and Great Britain. Regardless of whether the child is placed in foster care with or without the parents’ consent, the law requires semi-annual reviews and there is no time limit set on reunion. Nevertheless, there are foster children who remain in the foster home throughout the whole of childhood, on terms similar to permanent foster care or adoption. This paper concerns a selection of findings from a research project entitled ‘Is there a difference in being a foster child?’. Foster children aged 10–11 were interviewed three times and the children’s perspective was focused on, complemented by the perspective of their foster parent(s). When interviewed about their relationship to their natural family as well as to the foster family, and about having a sense of family belonging and expectations for the future, 11 of the 22 children perceived their stay in the foster home as permanent and regarded themselves as belonging only to the foster family, although all of the children had contact with their birth parents. The study concerns the children’s views as well as those of the foster parents. The perception of permanency in the absence of a legal option of permanency is discussed.     

Research Review: In a rush to permanency: preventing adoption disruption

Since the late 1990s, US, UK and Canadian policy have increasingly focused on improving permanency outcomes for looked‐after children. Although the ideal permanency outcome of reunification is attained for about half of the children entering out‐of‐home care, an increasing number of children are adopted each year. The vast majority of adoptions are stable and secure, but concerns about adoption disruption haunt child welfare workers when making this important permanency decision. Despite a variety of definitions employed in the literature, adoption disruption is a general term used to describe the failure or breakdown of an adoptive child’s placement. Studies dating back to the 1970s have reported adoption disruption rates and the characteristics associated with those involved in such cases. This paper reviews available research, principally from the United States, and offers possible explanations for the wide range of reported disruption rates in the literature. After reviewing the research, practice implications for improving adoption outcomes and suggestions for future research are presented.     

The impact of residential placement on child development: research and policy implications

The accumulated knowledge on the development of children in residential settings covers a lot of ground but leaves a great deal unturned. The article summarises what is known about child development in the context of residential settings and concludes that there is little evidence to draw on to make clear recommendations about what types of children are likely to benefit from what types of residential settings. It maintains that, in the absence of evidence, policy and practice regarding residential care often has been guided by ideology. Residence has become a place of last resort for young people who cannot receive the support and/or safety they need from their own families or from foster families, or who pose a danger to others. The article calls for more rigorous evaluations of the impact of residence on child outcomes as well as concerted efforts to apply research evidence to policy and practice.