“Try to make it seem like we're regular kids”: Youth perceptions of restrictiveness in out-of-home care

While there are several measures of living environment restrictiveness, none has used the youth perspective in conceptualizing and operationalizing restrictiveness. The purpose of this qualitative study was to obtain the perspectives of child welfare involved youth who have lived in out-of-home care. Using focus group methodology, 40 youth were asked to define restriction and give examples of how it is operationalized in practice. Youth defined restriction as “rules”. The rules were about what youth can do, where they can go, who they can be with and how and with whom they can communicate. These rules were primarily characterized as inconsistent, arbitrary, non-individualized and developmentally inappropriate, although some characterized them as beneficial in the long term. Rules were mostly attributed to adult need for power and avoidance of legal responsibility for the youths. Typical feelings about the rules were anger, resentment, feeling labeled, isolated and stigmatized. Relationships influenced perceptions: within a positive relationship, youth understood and tolerated the rules that limited independence. The perception of what were normal restrictions for other youth not in out-of-home care was another influencing factor. These findings are examined in light of cognitive and affective development in adolescence. Recommendations for improving the measurement of living environment restrictiveness as well as enhancing child welfare services are proposed.     

Family group decision making: Measuring fidelity to practice principles in public child welfare

This study describes the development and validation of a short, self-administered fidelity measure used to capture the perspectives of a range of individuals participating in a family group decision making conference. Exploratory factor analyses suggested either a two or a three factor solution. Findings from confirmatory factor analysis supported a three factor model that includes sets of practices yielding: (1) Productive Decision Making; (2) Family Group Inclusion; and (3) Professional Supportiveness. These results provide direction to public child welfare practitioners and policymakers about the importance and the feasibility of attending to multiple perspectives in assessing program delivery.     

Perceptions of fidelity to family group decision-making principles: examining the impact of race, gender, and relationship

This study explored the perceptions of fidelity to family group principles using comparative information from family, friends, and professionals, taking into account race and gender. White respondents felt there was a greater degree of fidelity than did the African American respondents, with other race respondents sometimes rating similarly to both white and African American respondents. Professionals generally perceived a greater level of fidelity and there were significant race by respondent interactions.     

“When You First Get There,You Wear Red”: Youth Perceptions of Point and Level Systems in Group Home Care

Child welfare involved youth are frequently referred to group home care. One common intervention utilized in group home care is behavior management systems. This intervention is operationalized as points, token economies, and level systems. Grounded in social learning and behavioral theories, the objective is to reinforce-pro-social behaviors and to provide mild negative consequences for undesirable behaviors. However, little is known about how child-welfare involved youth perceive these kinds of interventions and whether they believe them to be effective. Focus groups were conducted with 40 young adults known to independent living services and formerly in group home placement. The qualitative findings reveal that while youth felt structure was needed, how it was operationalized in group homes was restrictive, non-normative, and non-individualized. Implications for social work practice and further research using an attachment perspective are discussed.     

Aren't they just black kids? Biracial children in the child welfare system

In the USA, African‐American children are overrepresented in the child welfare system. However, little is known about the child welfare system experiences of biracial children, who are predominately both White and African‐American. To better understand this population, data from public child welfare in a US county were used to examine biracial children in the child welfare system. Results showed significant racial differences between children in the child welfare system. Despite the common belief that biracial children will have experiences similar to African‐American children, the child welfare system seems to view them differently. Biracial children are more likely to be referred, rated as high risk and investigated compared with White or African‐American children. Their mothers were younger, and were more often assessed as having physical, intellectual or emotional problems. These caregivers were also considered to have lower parenting skills and knowledge compared with White or African‐American caregivers. Although the disproportionate representation of African‐American children in the system has been well documented, this study provides evidence that biracial children are also overrepresented. Despite the fact that this is a rapidly growing population in the USA, there is little research available about biracial children and their families.