Upload
lewis-elliott
View
218
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Care planning and permanence
Improving outcomes for looked after children
Assessment and decision making
Security and permanence
Putting children at the centre
Making use of the evidence from research; similarities between SCRA research and English studies
Child development and well being; impact of neglect and emotional abuse on life chances
Respecting the rights of parents
Babies at risk- Ward et al research
• 57 high risk children; 43 followed up to third birthday; neglect most common form of maltreatment
• 65% identified before birth- almost all before 6 months• 20 mothers already permanently separated from older
child• Many care planning decisions temporary• Long delays- and several changes – before final
placement• Double jeopardy; period at risk with birth parents and
then removal from foster carers to whom they have become attached
• Similar to SCRA findings
Follow up at age 3;Ward research
• The 43 children fell into three groups;– 16 living at home- no ongoing concerns– 12 at home with severe ongoing concerns-
neglect and emotional abuse– 15 permanently separated from parents• Over half displayed developmental
problems/behavioural difficulties/aggression; delayed speech common
Why did it take so long?
Focus on supporting birth parents and safeguarding family, rather than individual children within it
Tensions between adult and children services
Expert witnessesRepeated parenting assessments
Why did it take so long? cont
Parents who had been looked after themselves as children received extensive support
Gaps in knowledge and understandingInvolvement of extended familySocial worker confidence lowRule of optimism and faith in parents’
ability to change- just over one third did so
Factors indicative of parental change
Parents who successfully changed were
• Less likely to have experienced abuse in childhood• More likely to overcome external rather than internal
risk factors• Able to come to terms with the removal of older
children• Able to acknowledge the risks posed by their
destructive behaviour patterns• Able not simply to engage with services but also make
positive use of support offered• Able to develop supportive informal networks
Birth of a child as a catalyst for change
• No parent overcame substance misuse if they continued to use drugs after the child was born
• All but one set of parents who made and sustained sufficient changes had addressed all known risk factors by the time the child was 6 months old
• Parents in the successful change group spoke of a ‘wake up call’ as a catalyst for change. No parent in insufficient change group said this.
Group discussion
True for us? How can we balance the rights of child and
parent? Can we ensure greater momentum in decision
making? What information would best assist your
decision making? health support? Information on child’s development?
What would you like to see different?
Concurrent planning?
Care planning is often sequential so that a secure placement is delayed until late in the process
Can we change our approach to planning so that we look longer term to child’s security and well being?
Concurrent planning to focus our decision making?
Places the needs and welfare of children at the forefront- whilst providing a high quality service to assist birth parents
Preliminary assessment of risk where adoption 60% likely
Child placed with carers who are approved to foster and to adopt
Parents offered service to establish changes they need to make within a very few months
Concurrent planning- benefits?
Child experiences good quality uninterrupted consistent care whilst assessments are being undertaken
Reduces number of placements for the child
If rehabilitation is not possible, child retains attachment relationships with caregivers without experience of loss and disruption of further moves
Concurrent planning?
Places the strain with the adultsAdults have to work within time limits to
focus on child’s needs for early permanence and avoidance of unnecessary moves
Group discussion
What does this imply for our management of children’s care journeys?
What would this mean for the Children’s Hearing?
Issues for contact?Relationship with the legal system?