Prevalence, Experiences, and Characteristics of Children and Youth Who Enter Foster Care through Voluntary Placement Agreements

A voluntary foster care placement (sometimes referred to as a voluntary placement agreement) is an agreement, entered into without court involvement, between a state or county child welfare agency and a child\u27s parents to place a child into out-of-home placement. When a child enters foster care through this type of placement, state and federal programs that cover children who enter child welfare due to a court order become the custodians of the voluntarily-placed-child\u27s placement, care, and supervision. In this cross-sectional, exploratory study, data from the Adoption and Foster Care Reporting System (AFCARS) was used to examine the characteristics and experiences of children who enter foster care through a voluntary foster care agreement, and to compare them with those of children who enter foster care through a court order. Findings indicate that children who are placed through a voluntary placement agreement differ from children who enter through a court order in their personal characteristics, as well as in their placement settings, length of placement, and manner of discharge from foster care. This study provides a baseline for future research into this area of child welfare practice

Permanency and placement planning for older youth with disabilities in out-of-home placement

Despite their overrepresentation in the child welfare system (Crosse, Kaye, & Ratnofsky, 1992; Sullivan & Knutson, 2000), little is known about the permanency and placement experiences of young people with disabilities in out-of-home placement. Using state administrative data, this study examined the experience of older youth with disabilities in foster care, focusing on placement stability, permanency planning, and placement outcomes. Findings include that older youth with disabilities were more likely to experience longer time in out-of-home placement, and higher rates of placement instability than their peers without disabilities. Additionally, analysis found that only 60% of the youth in the sample had a concurrent plan on file, and that youth with disabilities have different placement plans than their peers without disabilities. Implications for research, policy, and practice are discussed

Gentlemen's residences in 1850s Christchurch: an examination of the home of Joseph Brittan and John Cracroft Wilson

The Canterbury earthquakes have seen the demolitions of many buildings in Christchurch, including some of the city's earliest building stock. Linwood House was built for John Britten at around the same time as John Cracroft Wilson built Cracroft House. Although both men would have been members of the elite in the new settlement, the first houses they built are quite different. The houses were recorded by archaeologists prior to and during demolition, using the techniques of buildings archaeology. This paper discussesthe results of those investigations and considers the similarities and differences between the two houses in terms of both style and construction techniques

The Inclusion of Disability as a Condition for Termination of Parental Rights

Objectives: All 50 states and the District of Columbia have statutes outlining the grounds for terminating parental rights (TPR) in relation to child abuse and neglect. Although recent research has found that parents with disabilities are not more likely to maltreat their children than parents without disabilities (Glaun and Brown, 1999, Oyserman et al., 2000), studies have found very high rates of TPR of parents with disabilities (Accardo & Whitman, 1989). The objective of this study is to examine how states are including disability in their TPR statutes. Methods: This study used legal document analysis, consisting of a comprehensive Boolean search of the state codes of the 50 states and District of Columbia (DC) relating to TPR, using the most recent state code available on Lexis-Nexis in August 2005. TPR and related statutes were searched for contemporary and historical disability related terms and their common cognates, such as: “mental,” “disability,” “handicap,” and “incapacity.” Two researchers independently conducted the searches, and the searches were reconciled. A code list was then developed to measure for inclusion of disability, preciseness, scope, use of language, and references to accessibility or fairness. Statutes were then reanalyzed, and groupings developed. Results: Thirty-seven states included disability-related grounds for termination of parental rights, while 14 states did not include disability language as grounds for termination. Many of these state codes used outdated terminology, imprecise definitions, and emphasized disability status rather than behavior. All of the 14 states that do not include disability in TPR grounds allowed for termination based on neglectful parental behavior that may be influenced by a disability. Conclusions: The use of disability language in TPR statutes can put an undue focus on the condition of having a disability, rather than parenting behavior. Implications: This paper recommends that states consider removing disability language from their statutes, as such language risks taking the emphasis away from the assessment based on parenting behavior

Prevalence of children with disabilities in the child welfare system and out of home placement: An examination of administrative records

This article explores the prevalence and characteristics of children with disabilities within the child welfare system using administrative data from the State of Minnesota. This study finds that more than a fifth (22%) of children with substantiated maltreatment are labeled in administrative records as having a disability, and more than one quarter of children (27.9%) over age five. The most common type of disability among children with substantiated maltreatment was emotional disturbance, while other common disabilities included intellectual and developmental disabilities and learning disabilities. Using logistic regression, this study finds that children with substantiated maltreatment with disabilities were about two times more likely to be in out of home placement than children with substantiated maltreatment without disabilities

Child Abuse & Neglect: The inclusion of disability as a condition for termination of parental rights

Objectives: All 50 states and the District of Columbia have statutes outlining the grounds for terminating parental rights (TPR) in relation to child abuse and neglect. Although recent research has found that parents with disabilities are not more likely to maltreat their children than parents without disabilities (Glaun & Brown, 1999; Oyserman, Mowbray, Meares, & Firminger, 2000), studies have found very high rates of TPR of parents with disabilities (Accardo & Whitman, 1989). The objective of this study is to examine how states are including disability in their TPR statutes. Methods: This study used legal document analysis, consisting of a comprehensive Boolean search of the state codes of the 50 states and District of Columbia (DC) relating to TPR, using the most recent state code available on Lexis-Nexis in August 2005. TPR and related statutes were searched for contemporary and historical disability related terms and their common cognates, such as: “mental,” “disability,” “handicap,” and “incapacity.” Two researchers independently conducted the searches, and the searches were reconciled. A code list was then developed to measure for inclusion of disability, preciseness, scope, use of language, and references to accessibility or fairness. Statutes were then reanalyzed, and groupings developed. Results: Thirty-seven states included disability-related grounds for termination of parental rights, while 14 states did not include disability language as grounds for termination. Many of these state codes used outdated terminology, imprecise definitions, and emphasized disability status rather than behavior. All of the 14 states that do not include disability in TPR grounds allowed for termination based on neglectful parental behavior that may be influenced by a disability. Conclusions: The use of disability language in TPR statutes can put an undue focus on the condition of having a disability, rather than parenting behavior. Implications: This paper recommends that states consider removing disability language from their statutes, as such language risks taking the emphasis away from the assessment based on parenting behavior

Sustaining and Strengthening a Macro Identity: The Association of Macro Practice Social Work

Macro practice focuses on community-level interventions, such as management, organizing, research, and policy advocacy. Despite social work’s deep roots in this type of work, macro practice and macro practitioners often practice without support or connections with other macro practitioners, and are underrepresented in the profession. In 2006, a group of social workers, including academics and practitioners, formed the Association of Macro Practice Social Work (AMPSW). AMPSW works to strengthen the professional identity of macro practitioners, elevate the status of macro social workers, and address common concerns within the social work profession

Voluntary Placements in Child Welfare: A Comparative Analysis of State Statutes

Removing children from their families is a serious, and often traumatic, experience for children and youth, even if this process is a voluntary choice of the parents or caregivers. This exploratory study aimed to further the understanding of voluntary foster care placements, a topic on which there has been very little research and attention. For this content analysis, we analyzed the statutes of all 50 states and Washington D.C. We developed a coding rubric to record data on each statute, including factors such as definitions, timelines, and process for court involvement. Researcher memos were used to help identify themes across statutes, as well as unique cases. Findings suggest a wide degree of variation in how states regulate voluntary placement in foster care, with 11 states having no statutes at all, and states varying even on fundamental aspects of these placements such as parents maintaining legal custody and authority of their children. Several state\u27s statutes mention voluntary placements but provide no guidance at all on implementation, other states\u27 statutes provide a detailed description on processes including special considerations regarding access to treatment for children with disabilities. The lack of clarity in statutes on voluntary placements needs further attention by child welfare administrators and policy-makers, in order to ensure the on-going safety, permanency, and well-being of children in these voluntary arrangements