Improving the Lives of Children in Foster Care: The Impact of Supervised Visitation*

Abstract

Our purpose was to test a model explaining the quality of attachment of 123 children in foster care receiving supervised visitation with their biological parents. The results indicated that for families in which reunification is a goal, children who have more consistent and frequent contact with their biological parents have stronger attachments than children who have less contact. In addition, relationships between attachment and indicators of adjustment were examined. Children with higher levels of attachment had fewer behavioral problems, were less likely to take psychiatric medication, and were less likely to be termed ''developmentally delayed'' than were children with negative levels of attachment. Implications of these findings for case workers and other family service providers are discussed.

Welfare Policies and Adolescents: Exploring the Roles of Sibling Care, Maternal Work Schedules, and Economic Resources

“…The results from the Florida and Indiana studies are in line with prior research illustrating that some low-income working mothers adopt work-family management strategies that entail relying upon older children in the household to fulfill household duties and care for younger children (Burton 1997; Dodson and Dickert 2004), suggesting that adolescent involvement in sibling care can interfere with adolescents’ school-related activities. Yet, because we only examine a limited number of adolescent schooling outcomes, it could still be that taking on adult-like responsibilities, such as caring for younger siblings, help adolescents define their own identities as burgeoning adults and has beneficial implications for their own self-esteem and mental health as they make the transition from adolescence to adulthood as suggested by some researchers (Chase-Lansdale et al 2003).…”

“…It therefore could be that families in Connecticut did not increase their reliance upon sibling care because they were able to afford alternative care arrangements for younger children in the household. In Florida and Indiana, mothers might have increased their use of sibling care because financial resources were not enough to cover the costs of child care and other work-related expenses, as suggested by Dodson and Dickert (2004).…”

“…As such, adolescents may assume more household and adult-like responsibilities, such as caring for younger siblings, cleaning, shopping, cooking, or employment, when their mothers work (Burton 1997). Recent ethnographic findings indicate that adolescent girls take on more household duties when low-income parents work, particularly when mothers work low-wage jobs that do not pay enough to cover child care costs or other types of household assistance (Dodson and Dickert 2004). …”

Mexican American Adolescents' Family Caregiving: Selection Effects and Longitudinal Associations With Adjustment

“…The ramifications of family caregiving for adolescents’ development are not well understood (East, in press). There is, however, an emerging literature that is beginning to consider how excessive family caretaking responsibilities on the part of youth may affect developmental outcomes (Burton, 2007; Dodson & Dickert, 2004). Indeed, large amounts of adolescents’ family caregiving (helping parents, grandparents, or siblings with daily living assistance tasks such as bathing, dressing, and feeding 20 hours or more a week) have been found to be associated with children’s stress, depression, and school absences (Pakenham, Bursnall, Chiu, Cannon, & Okochi, 2006; Shifren & Kachorek, 2003).…”

Inhibited attachment disordered behavior in institutionalized preschool children: links with early and current relational experiences

“…When one considers research on foster care, another context of substitute care, the available research fails to provide clear insight on this issue. A few studies indicate that continued contact with at least one biological parent is positively associated with child well-being (Cantos, Gries, & Slis, 1997;McWey, Acock, & Porter, 2010), including quality of attachment (McWey & Mullis, 2004). Other work, however, documents negative effects of family contacts with the child, including visitation distress (Neil, Beek, & Schofield, 2003), loyalty conflicts (Leathers, 2003), as well as limited ability to contact foster parents when the child visits the parents' home (Strijker & Knorth, 2009).…”