The Strengths and Stressors tracking device indicated an adequate environment (including stability in housing, safety in community, food and nutrition, personal hygiene, transportation). The results indicated that an inadequate attention is paid to the learning environment needs of the child, as indicated by lack of school supplies in the home as well as frequent school absences.(“Strengths and Stressors Tracking Device”, n.d.) The clear area of stress as indicated by Strengths and Stressors test was in the area of Family and Caregivers (“Strengths and Stressors Tracking Device”, n.d.) In this part of the instrument, respondents are asked to rate the personal problems of the parent and whether they interfere with the parenting. Parents had clear problems because of their substance abuse and use of alcohol, their discordant romantic relationships and the degree of physical and mental health problems that were affecting parenting.(“Strengths and Stressors Tracking Device”, n.d.).. The Family Assessment Measure III also indicated significant unrest in the family unit and difficulty with parenting (“Family Assessment Measure 3” n.d.) The general scale indicated a high degree of argumentation and fighting in the family and low ability to resolve problems. Children responded by strongly agreeing that they believed the parents loved them, but that they were not always sure. Each member strongly disagreed with general statements about being well adjusted, happy and able to solve problems effectively and conclusively. Respondents strongly agreed with the fact that they often could not rely on family members to do their part, and that they don't really trust one another. (“Family Assessment Measure 3” n.d.)
Results from the Structured Decision Making Model were especially indicative (Frietag 2008).. This decision making model highlighted the fact that domestic abuse is present in the family home environment. It also indicated the problems withn the current care giver's substance abuse that interferes with ability to protect for and care for the child (Frietag 2008). Likewise, we found similar risk and threat results consistent with our other two battery tests, which were the Washington Assessment Matrix and the Ontario Eligibility Spectrum. Both of these tests indicated a lack of proper parenting primarily due to domestic violence and substance abuse in the home as well as the mental health condition of the caretaker (Barth 2003; “Ontario Child Welfare Eligibility 2015).
Proposed Tasks
We find that in addition to court ordered mandates, the parents would benefit from receiving guided in-home and out-of-home parental support and training. Thus, in addition to mandated sobriety and sobriety tests, as well as compliance with all other procedures, the parents must undergo parenting classes specifically targeted towards curbing the maltreatment and violence factors in the home.
The NSCAW has shown that based on the reports of parents using the Child Behavioral Checklist, over 40 percent of children between three and fourteen have scores which are high enough to indicate they should receive treatment for problem behavior (Barth, 2003). The problem is that parents might exaggerate these rates based on their own self reporting biases and possibly even conflate their own traumatic experiences of domestic violence with their child's bad behavior. One study found that parents tend to think their children are much more violent and abusive than their domestically violent partners compared to non-abusive parents. (Lau, Valeri, McCarty, & Weisz, 2006). The label of “bad child” given by parents is often associated with parental physical abuse (Lau et al., 2006). Barbara Bum and her colleagues (2004) found that only a small proportion of children with behavior problems receive treatment and, in all likelihood, a smaller population receives evidence-based services. Few parents who are abusive in the population actually receive any kind of treatment or instruction to correct their behaviors and so the evidence or chance for abuse to reoccur is heightened. There are certain assumptions that most people implicitly hold on what constitutes effective parenting. These include how much and how expressive is the use of control mechanisms by parents, what kind of interaction the parents and child have and how much warmth and close affection is offered to the child by the parent. These ideals often form the backbone for parenting programs. (Johnson 2008).
In mandating that the parents undergo parenting classes, we are recognizing some facts about this situation, that are discussed in recent research. Child physical abuse often, though not exclusively, occurs in a cycle that is played out at home with no intervention until child welfare services become involved. The coercive cycle model that exists is based upon escalating coercive and punitive behavior by parents and short term compliance by children (Chaffin et al., 2004). In a parent-child relationship with few positive interactions, a hostile relationship is developed that is built upon negative parental attributions of the child’s behavior and the use of harsh physical discipline that is utilized more often (Chaffin et al., 2004). Parents who engage in physically abusive discipline hold the false belief that nothing short of violence will work in order for their child to comply with the rules (Crouch & Behl, 2001). The child welfare field has been subjected to many fashionable, advocacy- driven policies over the years ranging from adoption promotion, prevention using in home treatment services, to the current ideology of family preservation.
A research study by Johnson et al. (2008) synthesized 70 parenting programs, that were not evidence-based, and concluded that those evaluated addressed at least one area of parenting difficulty, such as deficiencies in social cognitive processing, social skills, parent skills, impulse control, and stress management. Of the programs studied, only eight included three salient domains of parenting difficulty: social cognitive processing, parenting skills, plus either social skills or stress management. These results suggest few programs are available that focus on the five core domains of parenting difficulty. Access to programs that address a maltreating parent’s biggest parenting difficulty is important due to the fact that attendance and program completion.
The parenting program that the parents should be enrolled in can be in any format, either online or in person, but should be based on social learning theory. According to Arkan, Ustun, and Guvenir (2013), the best parenting programs are based on social learning theory, as PTP is, because that approach considers behavior to be shaped through the idea that similar behaviors will produce similar outcomes. The program costs associated have been found to be $10 per participant and saves more than it costs, unless the reduction in prevalence falls below 7% where net costs are positive (Sanders & Pidgeon, 2011). In a follow-up of participants ranging from three months to three years, results indicated that skills developed within the treatment program were sustained over time (Arkan, Ustun, & Guvenir, 2013).
In a study by Love, Sanders, Metzler, Prinz, and Kast (2013) the Triple P parenting program was transformed into an online-based delivery system for vulnerable families in an urban Los Angeles. The purpose of the study was to explore alternative program delivery systems due to high rates of attrition in community-based parenting programs. Barriers to meaningful participation have been cited as feelings of shame and blame, socioeconomic disadvantages, distrust of the mental health profession, fear of deportation, and high levels of family dysfunction (Knott & Donovan, 2010). When asked to rank their preference of learning formats, 158 ethnically diverse parents most preferred television, online programs, workshops, and written materials. The types of services ranked last by the parents were parenting groups, individual therapy, and home visits which, paradoxically, are the most common approaches (Metzler, Sanders, Rusby, & Crowley, 2012). Love et al. (2013) believe that adding an online social networking component to parenting programs is logical because 79% of people between 18 and 31 years old go online. An online option is convenient and reachable for parents, and it is consist with consumer preference. Of the 160 parents involved in the study, only five parents had a less than positive review. Those five parents did not find the Triple P method to be realistic or solution-based and stated parents do not talk to their children in the manner taught. At the end of the study, parents were asked if they would like to see more Triple P online parenting videos and the response was unanimously “Yes” across all 160 parents. Love et al. (2013) states that this was a particularly noteworthy finding as all of the parents were currently attending a parenting class outside of the study. In conclusion, an online based parenting program for high-risk parent
Conclusions
Undertaking this challenging assignment and learning about case planning theory opened my eyes to many of the pressures and points of consideration I must attend to as a future professional. For one, I gained greater insight into the sensitive context that each particular care requires. Two situations may be alike, but there are always mitigating factors involved. Yet at the same time, I realized what kind of stress and emotional weight realizing abuse in a family home may cause for the social work practitioner. Reporting the incidence of child abuse or neglect can become an ethical dilemma for this writer, as well as other child welfare workers who may become just as angry and frustrated as the parents when social services becomes involved. It may become especially exasperating to both parties when recurrent abuse is reported. Many of the high-risk parents who need the help of evidence-based parenting programs are not willing or able to receive services.
Childhood maltreatment has been found to have expansive and profound effects on laterl life functioning, including anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), dissociation, antisocial personality disorder, and abuse of alcohol and drugs (Kaplow & Widom, 2007). A child’s developing brain is vulnerable and constant activation of the biological stress response may change the structure and function of the brain, sometimes resulting in hyper arousal that is associated with PTSD. Many maltreated children and adolescents are more susceptible to developing substance dependence, which may be a form of self-medicating aimed at decreasing hyper-arousal symptoms (Delima & Vimpani, 2011). Much of the time, maltreating parents involved with child welfare services are mandated to attend parenting groups as part of their treatment. Unfortunately, only about 10% of family interventions used are evidence-based and cases of recidivism has been found to be 40% or higher ((Way, Chung, Johnson-Reid, & Drake, 2001). This evidence suggests that the efficacy of available parenting programs is questionable. The parental attributes associated with the risk of child maltreatment such as poverty, depression, substance abuse, social isolation, and poor problem-solving skills have also been found to predict attrition and poorer outcomes in parent training programs (Johnson, Stone, Lou, Ling, Claassen, & Austin, 2008). In order to combat these negative outcomes, there is a need to address consumer learning preference, availability of EBP, and other barriers to implementation of new programs such as cost, lack of advocacy. A promising evidence-based
On the upside, I realized also what power social service intervention has on making the daily lives of children and families better. The strength of government agencies is that there is funding and a body of guided passionate and devoted people who are not in this business for profit but who truly wish to change the lives of people for the better.
I also gained insight into the power of evidence based practices on the work of case planning. Case planning involves the implementation and treatment by considering at micro, macro, and mezzo levels and pursue a multi-level strategy for reaching at-risk parents. In order to reduce the high levels of coercive parenting in the community, a large proportion of the population would need widely accessible intervention programs in the community.
References
Arkan, B., Ustun, B., & Guvenir, T. (2012). An Analysis of Two Evidence-Based Parent Training
Programmes and Determination of the Characteristics for a New Programme Model.
Barth, R. (2009). Preventing Child Abuse and Neglect with Parent Training: Evidence and
Opportunities. Future of Children, 79(2), 95-118.
Barinbaum, R. (2007). Information Packet: Child, Youth and Family Involvement in Case
Planning (National Resource Center for Family-Centered Practice and Permanency
Planning). Hunter College School of Social Work.
Bolen, M. G., McWey, L. M., & Schlee, B. M. (2008). Are at-risk parents getting what they need? Perspectives of parents involved with child protective services. Clinical Social Work Journal, 36(4), 341–354.
Camasso, M. J., & Jagannathan, R. (2000). Modeling the reliability and predictive validity of risk assessment in child protective services. Children and Youth Services Review, 22(11), 873–896.
Chaffin, M. & Friedrich, B. (2004). Evidence-Based Treatments in Child Abuse and Neglect
Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 1097-1113.
Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2014). Case planning for families involved with child welfare agencies.
Coohey, C., Johnson, K., Renner, L. M., & Easton, S. D. (2013). Actuarial risk assessment in child protective services: Construction methodology and performance criteria. Children and Youth Services Review, 35(1), 151–161.
Delima, J., & Vimpani, G. (2011). The Neurobiological Effects of Childhood Maltreatment: An Often Overlooked Narrative Related to the Long-Term Effects of Early Childhood Trauma. Family Matters, 89,42-52.
DePanfilis, D., & Salus, M. K. (1992). Child protective services: A guide for caseworkers. DIANE Publishing.
Drumm, M., Carr, A., & Fitzgerald, M. (2000). The Beavers, McMaster and Circumplex clinical rating scales: a study of their sensitivity, specificity and discriminant validity. Journal of Family Therapy, 22(2), 225–238.
“Family Assessment Measure 3”(n.d.) Retrieved from http://chipts.ucla.edu/wp- content/uploads/downloads/2012/02/Family-Assessment-Measure-III.pdf
Frietag, Ralene. (2008) Structured decision making model. Children's Research Center.
Retrieved from http://www.nccdglobal.org/sites/default/files/publication_pdf/2008_sdm_book.pdf
Findlater, J. E., & Kelly, S. (1999). Child protective services and domestic violence. The Future of Children, 84–96.
Florida General Statutes § 39.1-101 (2015)
Hughes, R. C., & Rycusa, J. S. (2006). Issues in risk assessment in child protective services. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 1(1), 85–116.
Jagannathan, R., & Camasso, M. J. (1996). Risk assessment in child protective services: A canonical analysis of the case management function. Child Abuse & Neglect, 20(7), 599– 612.
Kaplow, J. & Widom, C. (2007). Age of Onset of Child Maltreatment Predicts Long-Term Mental Health Outcomes. Journal o f Abnormal Psychology, 116(1), 176-187.
K.K., Harper, M., Sullivan, K., & Edwards, T. (2007). Systemic case review data and child
protective service outcomes: The development of a model in Mississippi. Journal of
Evidence-Based Social Work, 4(3/4), 117-13
Child, Youth and Family Involvement in Case Planning
Kilpatrick, K. L. (2005). The Parental Empathy Measure: A New Approach to Assessing Child
Maltreatment Risk. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 75(4), 608-620. Kirk, R. S.,
Kim, M. M., & Griffith, D. P. (in press). Advances in the reliability and validity of the North
Carolina Family Assessment Scale. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social
Environment.
Knott, T. & Donovan, K. (2010). Disproportionate Representation of African American Children In Foster Care: Secondary Analysis of the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System. Child and Youth Services Review, 32(5), 679-684.
Lau, A., Valeri, S., McCarty, C., & Weisz, J. (2006). Abusive Parents’ Reports of Child Behavior Problems: Relationship to Observed Parent-Child Interactions. Child Abuse & Neglect, 30(6), 639-655.
Love, S., Sanders, M., Metzler, C., Prinz, R., & Kast, E. (2013). Enhancing Accessibility and Engagement in Evidence-Based Parenting Programs to Reduce Maltreatment: Conversations with Vulnerable Parents. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 7, 20-38.
Mallon, G., & Hess, P. (2005). Overview of systemic issues in child welfare. In G. Mallon &
P. Hess (Eds.), Child welfare for the twenty-first century: A handbook of practices,
policies, and programs (pp. 599-607). New York: Columbia University Press.
McCubbin, H., McCubbin, M., Thompson, A., & Huang, S. (1989). Family assessment and self- report instruments in family medicine research. Family Systems in Medicine, 181–214.
McDonald, T., & Marks, J. (1991). A review of risk factors assessed in child protective services. The Social Service Review, 112–132
Metzler, C.W., Sanders, M.R., Rusby, J.C., & Crowley, R. (2012). Using Consumer Preference Information to Increase the Reach and Impact of Media-Based Parenting Interventions in A Public Health Approach to Parenting Support. Behavior Therapy, 43(2), 257-270 National Resource Center for Family-Centered Practice and Permanency Planning. (n.d.).
Findings from the initial Child and Family Services Reviews. [PowerPoint slides].
Retrieved from http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/downloads/ppt/52-state-
findings.ppt Shackelfor
“Ontario Child Welfare Eligibility”(2015). Retrieved from http://www.children.gov.on.ca/htdocs/English/news/factsheets/04242007.aspx
Rosenstein, P. (1995). Parental levels of empathy as related to risk assessment in child protective services. Child Abuse & Neglect, 19(11), 1349–1360
Sanders, M. & Pidgeon, A. (2011). The Role of Parenting Programmes in the Prevention of Child Maltreatment. Australian Psychologist, 46, 199-209.Sanders, M., Cann, W., & Markie-Dadds, C. (2003). Why a Universal Population-Level Approach to the Prevention of Child Abuse is Essential. Child Abuse Review, 12, 145- 154
“Strengths and Stressors Tracking Device”(n.d.) Reetrieved from http://www.nwi.pdx.edu/pdf/Berry%20Strengths-StressorTracking.pdf
Way, I., Chung, S., Jonson-Reid, M., & Drake, B. (2001). Maltreatment Perpetrators: A 54- Month Analysis of Recidivism. Child Abuse and Neglect, 25, 1093-1108.
