Placement Choice in Temporary Foster Care: A Research Study

Abstract

This study examined 50 referrals for temporary family placement to assess the extent of choice and matching. The findings, discussed here by Suzette Waterhouse and Edwina Brocklesby, revealed that three-quarters of the placements were made in a crisis-led and unplanned way. Such unplanned placements had negative consequences, particularly in terms of contact, lack of knowledge of the family and a need for a subsequent move. The lack of a child-centred focus in the process by which children came to be placed was notable. An acute shortage of carers meant that it was increasingly the norm for placements of children to be made outside of carers' approval criteria. In such circumstances carers did not receive compensating support to remedy the placement deficits. The authors conclude that fostering continues in a state of crisis without due recognition of the ***profession-alisation of the service now being offered.

“Nothing goes as planned”: Practitioners reflect on matching children and foster families

“…Although research on matching clearly describes guidelines (see, e.g., De Maeyer, ; Moore et al, ; Ter Meulen & Vinke, ; Van Dam et al, ), matching in practice is far from a standardized procedure. Similar to previous studies (Boer & Spiering, ; Farmer & Pollock, ; Hollows & Nelson, ; Van Dam et al, ; Waterhouse & Brocklesby, ), our research shows that the matching decision is adjusted to fit the needs of a specific child and can be compromised by time–pressure, shortage of families, and incompleteness of information. Thus, matching in practice appears mostly pragmatic rather than systematic.…”

“…However, a major finding from the literature review of Zeijlmans, López, Grietens, and Knorth () was the recurrent mention of obstacles hindering the ability to implement these findings into practice. A shortage of foster carers caused practitioners to settle for a less optimal match (Hollows & Nelson, ); the effect of limited time resulted in less child‐centred matches (Waterhouse & Brocklesby, ), and not knowing some information, such as experiences with sexual abuse, enhanced the chances of a mismatch by underestimating the risk of a placement breakdown (Farmer & Pollock, ). Furthermore, Oosterman, Schuengel, Slot, Bullens, and Doreleijers () hypothesized that time–pressure and a lack of information on the history of children at first placement predict breakdowns.…”

“…Due to the potential impact of context on the matching decision and the resulting family foster care placement, it is remarkable that the influence of context on matching has not received more attention. Existing literature on foster care matching decisions comes mainly from Western countries, such as the Netherlands (Strijker & Zandberg, ; Ter Meulen & Vinke, ), Belgium (De Maeyer, ), the United Kingdom (Waterhouse & Brocklesby, ), and the United States of America (Moore et al, ). In the Netherlands, where this study is conducted, foster care is the main type of out‐of‐home care.…”

Sharing the care: the qualities sought of social workers by foster carers

“…There is, it is true, evidence that the problems of supply and matching are particularly severe for certain groups of foster children such as older children and adolescents ( Triseliotis et al . 1995 ; Waterhouse 1997) or children from ethnic minorities ( Thoburn 1990; Caesar et al . 1994 ) and in certain areas – those where the need is greatest ( Bebbington & Miles 1990) or which pay low rates ( Waterhouse 1997).…”

“…1995 ; Waterhouse 1997) or children from ethnic minorities ( Thoburn 1990; Caesar et al . 1994 ) and in certain areas – those where the need is greatest ( Bebbington & Miles 1990) or which pay low rates ( Waterhouse 1997). As a result, few if any authorities would claim that they are over‐endowed with foster carers.…”