and reach thousands of daily visitors
9 FEBRUARY 2009
NO 1398
Runaways
Over the past number of years, the
Office of Child and Family Service Advocacy (OCFSA) has received
numerous concerns from youth regarding the policies and practices in
residential settings pertaining to youth who run away or are absent
without permission. The OCFSA recognises that running away from
residential care is a serious issue. These concerns led to a discussion
of best practices and a subsequent decision to undertake this field
research. Although current literature provides guidelines and a
recommended framework to address the issue of running away, it is the
practice of the OCFSA to capture and report youths' own perceptions
regarding the care they are receiving. Therefore, the objective of this
paper is to understand the phenomenon of running away from residential
settings in Ontario, from the perspective of youth in care. To this end,
Advocates conducted six focus groups with youth in five different
residential settings throughout the province. This paper includes a
discussion of the relevant research, an analysis of the themes voiced by
these youth, and recommendations for best practice.
One way of examining the seriousness of the issue is the consideration
of the prevalence of youth running away from residential care. Biehal
and Wade, citing British studies, state: "While less than 1% of children
and young people are looked after, around 30% of those reported to the
police as missing were found to be from substitute care, the vast
majority from residential placements." (1999, p.367). The Child Welfare
League of America claims that "almost half of children in foster or
residential care have run at some point in time." (2004, p.8). They also
assert that "children in out of home care have more than twice the
likelihood of running away" as children living with their families
(p.8). Abrahams and Mungall (1992) found that youth were more likely to
run away repeatedly from residential care than from home and were also
more likely to travel further and to stay away longer (cited in Biehal &
Wade, 1998).
Youth in care can offer many reasons why they run away. The motivation is unique to each individual. However, researchers have suggested that the reasons for running away may be classified as either "push" or "pull" factors (Biehal & Wade, 2000; Finkelstein, Wamsley, Currie, & Miranda, 2004; Miller, Eggertson-Tacon, & Quigg, 1990). Push factors are those which drive youth to leave and are generally related to environmental factors in their placements, whereas pull factors are influences outside of their placements that draw youth to leave in order to go to something or someone.
Finkelstein et al.'s 2004 study elaborates on a number of push factors. The youth they interviewed cited boredom with their placement and a lack of programming as reasons why they run away. Youth also stated that they run away when they feel they are inappropriately placed, not receiving proper treatment or have little or no independence programming.
One of the greatest pull factors causing youth to run away from residential placements is the desire to see family and friends (Biehel & Wade, 2000; Finkelstein et al., 2004). Peer pressure is a factor for some youth; other youth who are planning to run away encourage friends in the residence to accompany them (Finkelstein et al., 2004; Miller et al., 1990).
It is also important to highlight the risks that face youth who run away. Although it is suggested that youth who run from care are more likely to stay with friends and family than on the street many youth are exposed to various types of risk, including sexual assault or exploitation, violence, substance abuse, and criminal offences (Biehal & Wade, 1999, 2000; Child Welfare League, 2004; Finkelstein et al., 2004; Miller et al., 1990). Although the majority of youth who run away were found to be older than thirteen, Biehal and Wade (1999, 2000) found that the younger children who run away are often at greater risk during the time they are out, even though the duration of their absences are shorter. There is no pattern or method of running away that is correlated to particular types of risk exposure. Research findings indicate that there is also very little correlation between the frequency with which youth run away and the type of risk youth may be exposed to in any specific incident (Child Welfare League, 2004; Finkelstein et al., 2004). Biehal & Wade (1999) conclude that because there is no associated pattern to risk, each absence should be treated as equally concerning, no matter how many times the youth has run away or the particular combination of push or pull factors involved in the specific incident.
JULIE KERR AND JUDY FINLAY
Kerr, J. and Finlay, J. (2000). Youth running from
residential care: The push and the pull. Relational Child and Youth
Care, 19, 1.
REFERENCES
Biehal, N. & Wade, J. (with Clayden, J. & Stein, M.) (1998). Going missing: Young people absent from care. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons.
Biehal, N. & Wade, J. (1999). Taking a chance? The risks associated with going missing from substitute care. Child Abuse Review, 8. pp. 366-376.
Biehal, N. & Wade, J. (2000). Going missing from residential and foster care: Linking biographies and contexts. British Journal of Social Work, 30. pp. 211-225.
Child Welfare League of America. (2004, March 8-9). Children missing from care: Proceedings of the expert panel meeting. Washington, D.C.
Finkelstein, M., Walmsley, M., Currie, D. & Miranda, D. (2004). Youth who chronically AWOL from foster care: Why they run, where they go, and what can be done. New York: NYC Administration for Children's Services, Vera Institute of Justice.
Miller, A.T., Eggertson-Tacon, C. & Quigg, B. (1990). Patterns of runaway behaviour within a larger systems context: The road to empowerment. Adolescence, 25, 98. pp. 271-289.
