3 APRIL 2009
NO 1421
Parental involvement
There is an extensive rationale for maintaining parent-child contact and involving parents in treatment programs, even in situations in which the child must be permanently removed from the biological family.
Rationale
First, there is a strong philosophical base that speaks to the value of
rearing children in a family setting. For instance, many writers
emphasize that stability in living arrangements and continuity of
relationships with parental figures promote a child's growth and
development [e.g., Goldstein et al. 1973; Laird 1979].
Second, the importance of the family is supported by various theoretical perspectives, including the role of parent-child bonding in the development of human beings and the significance of the biological family in human connectedness and identity formation [Hess 1982; Laird 1979].
Third, there is evidence of the negative impact of separation on parents as well as children. Studies have shown that parents experience severe reactions such as depression [Jenkins and Norman 1972] while children exhibit symptoms of serious emotional disturbance [Bryce and Ehlert 1971].
Fourth, research shows that, when parents are not effectively involved, the gains that children make while in a foster family or a residential treatment program are often negated or reversed if they return to an unchanged home environment [Taylor and Alpert 1973]. And, finally, there are pragmatic reasons for involving parents; as Fanshel [1981: ix] has noted, biological "parents are by far the most likely source of permanency for children." In fact, a follow-up study of children discharged from foster care by a public children's services agency found that over two-thirds of the children were returned to their parents [Fein et al. 1983].
ANTHONY N. MALUCCIO AND
JAMES K. WHITTAKER
Maluccio, A.N. and Whittaker, J.K. (1989). Therapeutic
foster care: Implications for parental involvement. In Hawkins, R.P. and
Breiling, J. (Eds.). Therapeutic Foster Care Critical Issues.
Washington D.C. Child Welfare League of America. p. 162.
REFERENCES
Bryce, M. and Ehlert, C. (1971). 144 foster children. Child Welfare, 50. pp. 499-503.
Fanshel, D. (1981). Foreword. in Maluccio, A.N. and Sinanoglu, P.A. (Eds.) The Challenge of Partnership: Working with parents of children in foster care. New York. Child Welfare League of America.
Fein,E.; Maluccio, A.N.; Hamilton, V.J. and Ward, D. (1983). After foster care: Outcomes of permanency planning for children. Child Welfare, 62. pp. 485-562.
Goldstein, J., Freud, A. and Solnit, A. (1973). Beyond the best interests of the child. New York. The Free Press.
Hess, P. (1982). Parent-child attachment concept: Crucial to permanancy planning. Social Casework, 63. pp. 46-53.
Jenkins, S. and Norman, E. (1972). Filial deprivation and foster care. New York. Columbia University Press.
Laird, J. (1979). An ecological approach to child welfare: Issues of family identity and continuity. In Germain, C.B. (Ed.). Social Work Practice: People and Environments. New York. Columbia University Press. pp.174-209.
Taylor, D.A. and Alpert, S. (1973). Continuity and
support following residential treatment. New York. Child Welfare
League of America.