and reach thousands of daily visitors
9 June 2008
NO 1307
Family support
One of the main features of the family support centre studied is the fact that it is really a little community within the community and connected to her. This is in contrast with some classic intervention agencies, such as the Protection Agency, living in autocracy and appearing to families as outside of normal life. In fact, we can make the parallel between the Centre and a person having a good social network and between some classic intervention agencies and a person living in isolation. Research has already shown the importance of social support, the positive role of having a good social network and the negative one of isolation (Cohen & McKay, 1984; Garbarino & Sherman, 1980) Palacio-Quintin, Jourdan-Ionescu & Martineau, 2001; Sarason, et al., 1987). As a community by itself, the Centre gives to parents the opportunity to experience social relationships and acquire social learning in a secure place, and as a community related to the neighbourhood it offers bridges to society in general. We suggest that the ecological model of human development be adapted and applied to organisations to conceptualize this phenomenon.
This approach seems well adapted to families in general and to at-risk families as well. But it is less evident to what degree it can be effective with very high-risk families. The Centre studied is receiving more and more very high-risk families and they feel they do not have enough or adequate resources to respond to their important and long-term needs. They have begun to feel the need for more professional specialized resources; the way in which this would be well coordinated with the community-based approach is not yet clear. We think that this situation is not particular to the Centre we have studied, but it is a general tendency. Can this kind of community centre afford the responsibility to answer to all kinds of family problems? Community-based centres are expected to prevent individual and family problems. Is this compatible with the therapeutic work needed for families in high distress? This is a question that must be seriously studied. We need to know which outcomes are possible for which kind of families and problems rather than think about similar outcomes for everyone.
To be valid, the evaluation of outcomes in any kind of intervention has to be related to the analyses of the intervention's characteristics. Community-based family support centres represent a big challenge in this matter because of their holistic approach. It is difficult to relate effects to aspects of the intervention because of that holistic approach and because families attending these centres participate in several and varied activities. Too many dimensions have to be considered. That is why in-depth descriptions have to be carried out before being able to conduct systematic evaluations. Nevertheless, we can already say that mixed and multidimensional methodologies have to be used and an interdisciplinary perspective has to be taken: organisational, social, psychological and educational questions have to be considered. In the classical measurement of individual outcomes, some dimensions such as social network evolution, self-esteem and confidence, feelings of control of one's own life and depression appear to be necessary if we consider the goals and philosophy of the studied centre. We think that more importance has to be given in particular to observation of new social behaviours, the dynamics between parent and child and behaviour changes in daily life.
E. PALACIO-QUINTIN
Palacio-Quintin, E. (2006). A case study of a
community-based family support centre in Quebec. International
Journal of Child and Family Welfare, 9, 1-2. pp.60-61
REFERENCES
Cohen, S. and McKay, G. (1984). Social Support, stress and the buffering hypothesis: A theorical analysis. In Baum, A.; Singer, J.E. and Taylor, S. (Eds.). Handbook of Psychology and Health, Vol IV. Hillside, NJ. Erlbaum.
Garbarino, J., and Sherman, D. (1980). High-risk neighbourhoods and high-risk families: The human ecology of child maltreatment. Child Development, 51, 1. pp. 188-198.
Palacio-Quintin, E., Jourdan-Ionescu, C., and Martineau, G. (2001). Evaluation du reseau social de l'enfant prescolaire et de ses parents chez les familles a risque. In M. CORBILLON (Ed.). Suppleance familiale. Nouvelles approches, nouvelles pratiques. Paris. Matrice.pp. 219-234.
Saranson, B., Shearin, E., Pierce, G., and Saranson, I. (1987). Interrelations of social support measures: Theorical and practical implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1. pp. 222-1,225.
