“The Real Work is What They Do Together”^*: Peer Support and Birth Parent Change

Abstract

With the passage of the Adoption and Safe Families Act (P.L. 105-89; ASFA), birth parents of children in foster care face a relatively brief time frame within which to successfully demonstrate progress in their reunification efforts. This progress includes engagement in a case plan, involvement in services, and visitation with children-efforts that are emotionally and practically challenging for many birth parents. Although a number of case and service characteristics associated with successful reunification have been identified (e.g., Child Welfare League of America, 2002;Westat, 1995), relatively little attention has been focused on the nature of birth parents' change processes and their related service needs.A number of authors have chronicled the intense emotions precipitated by child removal. Although dated, Jenkins (1969) found that birth parents most frequently reported feelings of sadness, worry, and nervousness. Other common feelings included emptiness, anger, bitterness, thankfulness, and relief for some parents; guilt and shame for some; and numbness or a feeling of being paralyzed for still others (Jenkins, 1969). Feelings of isolation are often reported (Levin, 1992), especially if parents decide to make changes for reunification with their children that involve severing ties with friends and/or family (Maluccio, Warsh, & Pine, 1993). A sense of powerlessness is also common, arising from birth parents' feelings of being controlled by the child welfare system and without influence in decision making regarding their children (Levin, 1992;Maluccio, Fein, & Olmstead, 1986). Another emotional reaction birth parents often experience is a decrease in self-esteem (Levin, 1992;Maluccio et al., 1986). Birth parents may also feel ambivalence about their parenting role (Bicknell-Hentges, 1995;Hess & Folaron, 1991;Maluccio et al., 1986)-feelings that may be indicated by expression of "conflicting feelings

Learning How to Dance with the Public Child Welfare System: Mexican Parents' Efforts to Exercise Their Voice

“…FGDM meetings are initiated by child welfare agencies whenever a critical decision about a child is required (American Humane Association, 2008): ''FGDM processes actively seek the collaboration and leadership of family groups in crafting and implementing plans that support the safety, permanency and well-being of their children'' (p. 1). Other interventions that aim to facilitate parents' engagement include parent-to-parent role modeling (Cohen & Canan, 2006), foster parent-to-parent dyad relationships (Linares, Montalto, Li, & Oza, 2006), and mutual aid/support peer groups (Frame et al, 2006). These interventions have focused on developing informal sources of support, parent empowerment, and promoting parents learning from the experiences of other parents who have successfully negotiated the public child welfare system.…”

“…The families involved with the public child welfare system are highly stigmatized and isolated throughout the case process. Parents often feel powerless, controlled, and may lack the knowledge to navigate complex service systems, such as the child welfare system (Kemp, Marcenko, Hoagwook, & Vesneski, 2009;Frame, Conley, & Berrick, 2006). Among Latino families less is known about how parents negotiate exercising their voice (i.e., voicing their opinions, concerns, and feelings about the case) and how parents' perceive workers' reactions to their voice.…”

Mainstreaming Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Family Law: The Israeli Child Protection Law as a Case Study

“…19 Despite concerns for the behavioral and emotional development of out-of-home children, children who were placed in foster families for relatively long periods showed improved intrafamily and social relationships. 24 A TJ perspective reveals that the sheer authority invested in the function of CPSWs to remove children from their homes makes it difficult for families to trust them and to resort to their services in order to advance the best interests of the children. Families attacked CPSWs for "stealing children from their parents," and at the same time, following scandals relating to tragic deaths of children, the media portrayed CPSWs as "neglecting the children."…”

Multiple Family Groups for Child Behavior Difficulties

“…Finally, groups were co-facilitated by caregivers with personal experiences navigating the child mental health system, as well as traditional mental health clinicians. Known as parent advocates, these individuals provided modeling, practical advice, and unique capacities to build relationships with caregivers by virtue of their life experiences (Frame, Conley, & Berrick, 2006). …”