Factors Influencing the Subjective Well-Being of Adolescents in out-of-Home Care. A Mixed Method Study
- 4 Downloads
Children’s subjectisuppleve well-being (SWB) constitutes an important component in the understanding of their quality of life and refers to the opinions and evaluations made by children themselves about the main aspects of their lives, and their satisfaction with these life aspects. This research focused on children whose SWB has been little investigated. In Spain, 38% of children in out-of-home placements are in residential care, 46% in kinship care and 16% in non-kin foster care. The aim of this study was to analyse SWB among adolescents in care, considering the type of placement in greater depth and how it correlated with several explanatory variables. We adapted the International Survey of Children’s Well-Being questionnaire for adolescents in care aged 12–14 years old, including 3 psychometric scales on SWB: Overall Live Satisfaction, the Students’ Life Satisfaction Scale, and the Personal Well-being Index—School Children. The response rate was 58% (N = 700). Multiple regressions were used, an open question was also included and categorical content analysis was done. Results indicated that adolescents in foster care (kinship and non-kinship) reported better SWB in all life domains than those in residential care. Variables, such as the number of placements, the amount of time spent in the last placement, a previous failed foster placement and satisfaction with caregivers had an impact on adolescents’ SWB. Links between these results and those obtained in the qualitative analysis were particularly notable as regards relationships with the people who lived with them, placement instability, and lower life satisfaction among adolescents in residential care.
KeywordsAdolescents Out-of-home care Subjective well-being Residential care Foster care Kinship care
We would like to express our thanks to the children who have participated in the study.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Confidentiality and anonymity of the data were ensured according to Spanish Act 15/1999 on data confidentiality. Individual data was encoded to ensure anonymity. This study was approved by the department of the Catalonian Government responsible for the Child Protection System (DGAIA). The informants participated voluntarily and without receiving incentives.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- Bardin, L. (2002). El análisis de contenido. Madrid: Ediciones Akal.Google Scholar
- Bravo, A., & Del Valle, J. F. (2003). Las redes de apoyo social de los adolescentes acogidos en residencias de protección. Un estudio comparativo con población normativa. Psicothema, 15, 136–142.Google Scholar
- Burgess, C., Rossvoll, F., Wallace, B., & Daniel, B. (2010). It’s just like another home, just another family, so it’s nae different’ Children’s voices in kinship care: A research study about the experience of children in kinship care in Scotland. Child & Family Social Work, 15(3), 297–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., & Rodgers, W. L. (1976). The quality of American life: Perceptions, evaluations, and satisfactions. New Year: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
- Casas, F., & Bello, A. (2012). Calidad de vida y bienestar infantil subjetivo en España. Madrid: UNICEF.Google Scholar
- Davern, M. (2016). The subjective wellbeing evaluation toolkit: A resource to support the use of subjective wellbeing to measure the impact of community programs and public policy initiatives. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
- DGAIA. (2016). Informe estadístic mensual. Barcelona: Direcció General d’Atenció a la Infància i l’Adolescència. Generalitat de Catalunya.Google Scholar
- Farmer, E., & Moyers, S. (2008). Kinship care. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
- Martín, E. (2015). Niños, niñas y adolescentes en acogimiento residencialun análisis en función del género. Qurriculum: Revista de Teoría, Investigación y Práctica Educativa, 28, 88–102.Google Scholar
- MSSSI (2015). Boletín de datos estadísticos de medidas de protección a la infancia. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad, Servicios Sociales e Igualdad, 18. Retrieved from: http://www.mscbs.gob.es/ssi/familiasInfancia/Infancia/pdf/Boletinproteccion18provisionalcorrecto.pdf
- Rees, G. (2011). Still running 3: Early findings from our third national survey of young runaways. London: The Children's Society.Google Scholar
- Rees, G., & Main, G. (2015). Children’s views on their lives and well-being in 15 countries: A report on the Children’s worlds survey, 2013-14. Children’s worlds project (ISCWeB). Retrieved from http://www.isciweb.org/_Uploads/dbsAttachedFiles/ChildrensWorlds2015-FullReport-Final.pdf
- Rees, G., Goswami, H., Pople, L., Bradshaw, J., Keung, A., & Main, G. (2012). The good childhood report. England: The Children's Society and University of York.Google Scholar
- Schwartz, C., Waddell, C., Barican, J., Gray-Grant, D., Dickson, S., & Nightingale, L. (2014). Kinship foster care. Children’s Mental Health Research Quarterly, 8(3), 1–16. Vancouver: Children’s Health Policy Centre, Simon Fraser University.Google Scholar
- Tomyn, A. J. (2013). Youth connections subjective well-being report. Part a: Report 4.0. Australia: RMIT University.Google Scholar
- UNICEF. (2016). Fairness for Children: A league table of inequality in child well-being in rich countries, Innocenti Report Card (Vol. 13). Florence: UNICEF, Innocenti Research Centre.Google Scholar
- Unrau, Y. (2010). Defining a Foster Care Placement Move: The Perspective of Adults Who Formerly Lived in Multiple Out-of-Home Placements. WMU: Social Work Faculty Publications. Paper 6.Google Scholar
- Wade, J., Biehal, N., Farrelly, N., & Sinclair, I. (2011). Caring for abused and neglected children. Making the right decisions for reunification or long-term care. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
- Whittaker, J. K., Holmes, L., Del Valle, J. F., Ainsworth, F., Andreassen, T., Anglin, J., & Zeira, A. (2016). Therapeutic residential Care for Children and Youth: A consensus statement of the international work group on therapeutic residential care. Residential Treatment for Children & Youth, 33(2), 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar