Professional Judgments and Decisions on Placement in Foster Care and Reunification in Portugal

This study aims to analyse professional judgments and decisions made in the Portuguese child care system in face of a case vignette of child maltreatment. Using the approach proposed by Benbenishty et al. (2015), we assessed the decisions of professionals, such as to place the child in foster care or reunify her with her family, on the basis of a series of judgments (e.g. substantiation of alleged abuse and neglect, risk assessments), that are influenced by the characteristics of the case, the decision making context, and mother’s and child’s wishes. We conclude that there are different approaches to the case based on different professionals’ attitudes that can be classified in two groups: one more pro-removal and other anti-removal. These groups presented different risk assessments and intervention recommendations, and their decisions where significantly influenced by the mother’s and child’s wishes. Furthermore, we have done comparisons with studies made in other countries, concluding that the country context can be an important factor that leads to different outcomes. Implications for both practice and research are presented.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Decision making in child protection:An international comparative study on maltreatment substantiation, risk assessment and interventions recommendations, and the role of professionals’ child welfare attitudes

Item does not contain fulltextChild welfare professionals regularly make crucial decisions that have a significant impact on children and their families. The present study presents the Judgments and Decision Processes in Context model (JUDPIC) and uses it to examine the relationships between three independent domains: case characteristic (mother's wish with regard to removal), practitioner characteristic (child welfare attitudes), and protective system context (four countries: Israel, the Netherlands, Northern Ireland and Spain); and three dependent factors: substantiation of maltreatment, risk assessment, and intervention recommendation. The sample consisted of 828 practitioners from four countries. Participants were presented with a vignette of a case of alleged child maltreatment and were asked to determine whether maltreatment was substantiated, assess risk and recommend an intervention using structured instruments. Participants’ child welfare attitudes were assessed. The case characteristic of mother's wish with regard to removal had no impact on judgments and decisions. In contrast, practitioners’ child welfare attitudes were associated with substantiation, risk assessments and recommendations. There were significant country differences on most measures. The findings support most of the predictions derived from the JUDPIC model. The significant differences between practitioners from different countries underscore the importance of context in child protection decision making. Training should enhance practitioners’ awareness of the impact that their attitudes and the context in which they are embedded have on their judgments and decisions

Comparison of parents' and social workers' assessments of the quality of life of children at risk

This study compares parents' and social workers' assessments of the quality of life (QOL) of children at risk and the contribution to these assessments of parents' economic status, receipt of professional intervention, and cooperation. The QOL of 52 children at risk, half who had been removed from home, half who were kept at home, was assessed by their parents and social workers, using a questionnaire based on Shye's Systemic Quality of Life Model. The parents rated the children's QOL in both settings higher than their social workers. However the disparity between the parents' ratings of the children's OQL in the two settings was smaller than that of the social workers. Moreover, the parents' economic status contributed to their own assessments, but not to the social workers'. Their cooperation contributed more to the social workers' assessments than to their own. The receipt of professional intervention contributed only to the social workers' assessments. The many differences in their QOL assessments underscore the need for a greater dialogue between social workers and parents, especially for a timely dialogue on the outcomes of the interventions.Assessments Parents Children at risk Removing from home Quality of life

Representations of fathers and mothers in court petitions for dependent minor status for children at risk

The study compares child protection workers' portrayals of fathers and mothers in the court petitions that they write to obtain authorization to place a child at risk in alternative care or under state guardianship at home. Forty-six petitions in three cities in Israel were content analyzed. Consistent with previous studies at other stages of the child protection process, the analysis shows that the child protection workers focus on the mother and pay little attention to the father and, moreover, that it treats the mother as the parent responsible for the problem. It also shows that the petitions virtually ignore the impact that the very difficult life conditions of most of the women may have on their maternal functioning. The authors conclude that the differential portrayal of mothers and fathers in the petitions reflects the social construction of parenting in our society as well as the workers' beliefs that their portrayals will convince the court to grant their petitions.