"Some Type of Way": An Ethnography of Youth Aging Out of the Child Welfare System

In the United States, the average 18-year-old is not expected to live without support and resources from his or her family. However, in many states, youth leave the child welfare system because at their age they are no longer eligible to receive services. In many states this is at age 18. These youth “aging out” of the system must negotiate the transition out of care simultaneously with the transition to adulthood. Unsurprisingly, youth aging out of the child welfare system experience poor outcomes compared to their age-mates across multiple domains including employment, education, housing, health, substance use, mental health, justice system involvement, and early parenting. While agencies offer services targeting youth aging out, hardships and poor outcomes persist. The difficulties these youth negotiate are complex and influenced by structural conditions. An understanding of how youth aging out negotiate the transition out of the child welfare system is lacking. This ethnography explores the experiences and struggles of youth aging out as they leave care. Additionally, the study examines and critiques services for youth aging out. Using a capital development perspective as a framework, this study offers unique insights about how policies and programs can assist youth transition out of the child welfare system more smoothly

Gene-environment interplay and the importance of self-control in predicting polydrug use and substance-related problems

Using the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), the current study applies a general biosocial theoretical model to polydrug use and associated substance-related problems. Along with measures of molecular genetic polymorphisms, neurocognitive skills, self-control, and environmental pathogens a recursive path modeling strategy was used to empirically examine the relations between these biosocial measures and polydrug use, alcohol, and drug-related problems in a subsample of 1136 adolescent males (Mean age=21.96, SD=1.73). Results supported the main predictions of the biosocial model finding significant path coefficients across key constructs. In particular, the role of poor self-regulation was found to be sturdy across path models.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/61301/1/Gene-environment.pd

Gender Support Disparities in a Majority-Female Profession

AbstractTheory and empirical evidence establish gender disparities in work pay and promotion trajectories, particularly in majority-male workplaces. Workplace support’s role, particularly in majority-female workplaces, in facilitating gendered occupational trajectories is less clear. Authors used a statewide sample of child welfare workers (N = 1,501) to examine gender differences in support and analyzed qualitative interviews with a subsample of participants (n = 37) to explore the role of gender in support perceptions. Analyses indicated that men perceived more supervisory and organizational support, whereas gender was not related to coworker support. The qualitative analysis indicated that receiving support required initiative. Men took initiative because they felt entitled. Many women expressed reservations, often warranted from experience, about initiating support to avoid bothering others and to honor workplace hierarchy. Men’s initiative allowed them access to support, thus increasing propensity toward job success. This study indicates that gender differences in workplace support may contribute to producing a self-perpetuating system of structural inequality.</jats:p

Ensuring Authentic Representation and Collaboration Along with Research to Re-Design Child Welfare

In this invited paper, we critique Barth and colleagues’ (2021). “Research to Consider While Effectively Re-Designing Child Welfare Services” paper that presents 10 commonly held misconceptions in child welfare to provide a foundation for child welfare system reform. We argue that research alone cannot guide the reform of the child welfare system. Rather, we argue that people with lived expertise in the child welfare system and programs must be involved in all parts of collaborations in order to re-design child welfare. Research has limitations and privileging it in setting any reform agenda and efforts is potentially dangerous. We conclude that for effective child welfare system re-design to occur, research-policy-practice partnerships must be built with people with lived expertise in the child welfare system and programs. </jats:p