Factors Affecting the Form of Substitute Family Care

Abstract

Abstrakt: V současné době prochází významnými změnami systém péče o ohrožené děti, ať už z hlediska institucionálního, tak legislativního. Na jednu z dílčích oblastí probíhajících změn se zaměřují výzkumné aktivity realizované v rámci Studentské grantové soutěže nesoucí název Faktory ovlivňující formu náhradní rodinné péče. Tímto tématem se zabýváme, neboť v České republice rozlišujeme různé formy náhradní rodinné péče, do níž jsou umísťovány děti z rozličných důvodů, neznáme však přesné souvislosti tohoto umísťování. Cílem realizovaného výzkumu bylo zjistit četnost zvolení dané formy umístění dítěte do náhradní rodinné péče dle sledovaných proměnných. Výzkumný soubor kvantitativně pojatého výzkumu byl tvořen dětmi svěřenými do jedné z forem náhradní rodinné péče v Moravskoslezském kraji.Klíčová slova: náhradní rodinná péče, pěstounská péče, poručenství s péčí, svěření dítěte do péče jiné osoby, sociální pracovník, sociálně-právní ochrana dětí Factors Affecting the Form of Substitute Family CareAbstract: Recently, the system of care for endangered children has changed from the institutional as well as legislative point of view. In one of the partial areas of ongoing changes, research activities realised within the Students' Grant Competition called The Factors Affecting the Form of Substitute Family Care are being focused. We deal with this topic because various forms of substitute family care are distinguished in the Czech Republic, where children are placed for various reasons, but we do not know the correct context of such placements. The main aim of the realised research was to find out the frequency of choosing a given form of placing children in substitute family care according to followed variables. The research sample of the quantitative research was consisted of children placed in one of the forms of substitute family care in the Moravian-Silesian region.Keywords: substitute family care, foster care, guardianship, entrusting child to care of another person, social worker, social-legal protection of children

Selected Aspects of Social and Legal Protection of Children: Expert Approach versus Public Opinion

“…Individual forms of replacement care with an emphasis on foster care are often seen as an alternative to institutional care (see, for example, Bauer, 1995;Matějček, 1998;Novák, 2008;Zezulová, 2012;Sobotková & Očenášková, 2013; , Cilečková, & Hašková, 2015). There are also studies investigating opinions of various stakeholder groups (see, for example, Vávrová, Musilová, & Polepilová, 2014;Vávrová & Kroutilová Nováková, 2015).…”

“…The above hierarchy shows that the discourse of non-institutionalisation of children and youth is deeply rooted in Czech society: only 8% of the respondents considered replacement care by an institution (children´s home) the most appropriate method of child care. In this respect, there are in fact no contradictions between the expert approach to replacement family care and the public opinion (see, for example, Běhounková, 2012;Chrenková, Cilečková, & Hašková, 2015;Vávrová, Hrbáčková, & Hladík, 2015). Unlike the case of the boundary of criminal liability, an important role in this context was probably played by an extensive educational campaign as well as the fact that media covered problems of institutional care rather than those of non-institutional care.…”

Untitled

“…There has been wide expert discussion in Czech society for decades concerning both the appropriateness and potential negative impact of institutional care on the future life of the child (see, for example, Matějček & Dytrych, 1994;Kovařík, 1998;Bittner et al, 2007;Kubíčková, 2011;Běhounková, 2012;Vávrová, Hrbáčková, & Hladík, 2015). Individual forms of replacement care with an emphasis on foster care are often seen as an alternative to institutional care (see, for example, Bauer, 1995;Matějček, 1998;Novák, 2008;Zezulová, 2012;Sobotková & Očenášková, 2013;Chrenková, Cilečková, & Hašková, 2015). There are also studies investigating opinions of various stakeholder groups (see, for example, Vávrová, Musilová, & Polepilová, 2014;Vávrová & Kroutilová Nováková, 2015).…”