Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Family Engagement Strategies in Child Welfare Practice

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Contemporary Issues in Child Welfare Practice

Part of the book series: Contemporary Social Work Practice ((Contemp. Social Work Practice))

Abstract

Engagement with families involved in the child welfare system is challenging for even the most seasoned professionals. Effective engagement can become compromised by the complexity of legal mandates, the crisis nature of the work, the economic and social challenges faced by children and families, an often critical public, and less than optimal agency staffing patterns. Opportunities to impact the lives of children and families in crisis, to improve a family’s capacity to care for their children, and to enhance a young person’s options for permanency rest upon the ability to engage clients in a meaningful partnership. Workers who operate from a strengths-based, solution-focused perspective are able to see opportunities for change in even the most complicated family situations and understand that establishing a meaningful connection is the first step in addressing difficult life issues.

To effectively engage families as partners, child welfare workers must be prepared to share power, ask for and use feedback, and see themselves as coaches or mentors who stand beside families and not in front of them. The skills that are required include the ability to suspend quick judgments, recognize one’s own frame of reference, respect differences, and anticipate challenges. Family engagement practices such as Family Group Decision Making and Family Finding can help to transform the child welfare system of care from one of legal authority over families to one of partnership with families. As these practices mature and become more widely disseminated, one measure of success will be the adoption of the core principles into a community philosophy. Integration of family engagement practices into traditional child welfare services can provide families with opportunities to assume control of their lives, as well as more options for child welfare professionals to engage in supportive interventions that are likely to increase job satisfaction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Blended Perspectives Meetings are used to allow family/kin to see how isolated the child/youth/caregiver is, to identify strengths and needs of the child/youth/caregiver, to identify the overarching need in a young person’s or family’s life, and to identify the individuals who will be active members of the child’s lifelong support network. They are not forums for decision making.

  2. 2.

    Adapted from (Gibson 2011).

References

  • Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1973). The development of infant–mother attachment. Review of Child Development Research, 3, 1–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Bowlby, J. (1991). An ethological approach to personality development. American Psychologist, 46, 331–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, T., Malm, K., Williams, S. C., & Ellis, R. (2011). Putting together the puzzle: Tips and techniques for effective discovery in family finding (Publication No. 2011–31). Washington, DC: Child Trends. Retrieved from http://familyfinding.org/resourcesandpublications.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman, J. C. (2005). Engagement in children, youth, and family services: Current research and best practices. In G. Mallon & P. Hess (Eds.), Child welfare for the twenty-first century: A handbook of practices, policies and programs (pp. 72–86). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman, J. C. (2008). A study of engagement in neighborhood-based child welfare services. Research on Social Work Practice, 18(6), 555–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Humane Association. (2008). Family Group Decision Making in child welfare: Purpose, values and processes. Retrieved from http://www.americanhumane.org/fgdm.

  • American Humane Association. (2009). A compilation of state and provincial laws, policies, rules and regulations on Family Group Decision Making and other family engagement approaches in child welfare decision making. Retrieved from http://www.americanhumane.org/fgdm.

  • American Humane Association. (2010). Guidelines for Family Group Decision Making in child welfare. Englewood, CO: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, C. M., & Stewart, S. (1982). Mastering resistance. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antle, B. F., Christensen, D. N., van Zyl, M. A., & Barbee, A. P. (2012). The impact of the Solution Based Casework practice model on federal outcomes in public child welfare. Child Abuse and Neglect, 36(4), 342–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appleby, G. A., Colon, E., & Hamilton, J. (2007). Diversity, oppression, and social functioning: A person-in-environment assessment and intervention. Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Applied Research Center for Strong Communities and Schools (2012). Family connection demonstration project: Supplemental evaluation report. Prepared by Michelle M. Maike, Gregory J. Benner and D. Scarsella. Tacoma, WA: University of Washington Tacoma. Retrieved from http://familyfinding.org/resourcesandpublications.html

  • Barn, R., Das, C., & Sawyerr, A. (2009). Family group conferences and black and minority ethnic families: An evaluation study of two community-based organisations in London. London: Family Rights Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, M., & Wilson, K. (2006). Children’s views of family group conferences. British Journal of Social Work, 36, 671–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellamy, J. L. (2009). A national study of male involvement among families in contact with the child welfare system. Child Maltreatment, 14(3), 255–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg, I. K., & Kelly, S. (2000). Building solutions in child protective services. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, L. M. (2007). Socioeconomic factors and substandard parenting. Social Service Review, 81(3), 485–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berzin, S. C. (2006). Using sibling data to understand the impact of family group decision making on child welfare outcomes. Children and Youth Services Review, 28, 1449–1458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bickman, L., Vides de Andrade, A. R., Lambert, E. W., Doucette, A., Sapyta, J., Boyd, A. S., & Rauktis, M. E. (2004). Youth therapeutic alliance in intensive treatment settings. Journal of Behavioral Health and Services Research, 31(2), 134–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bissell, M. & Miller, J. (n.d.). Background on family finding. Retrieved from http://www.childfocuspartners.com

  • Bowlby, J. (1977). The making and breaking of affectional bonds. I. Aetiology and psychopathology in the light of attachment theory. An expanded version of the Fiftieth Maudsley Lecture, delivered before the Royal College of Psychiatrists, 19 November 1976. British Journal of Psychiatry, 130(3), 201–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, B. (2006). Facilitating family decision making: A study of the family welfare conference service in the HSE Western Area. Galway, Ireland: National University of Ireland, Department of Political Science and Health Service Executive, Child & Family Research and Policy Unit. Retrieved from http://www.childandfamilyresearch.ie/documents/fwcfinal report.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bringewatt, E., Allen, T., & Williams, S. C. (2013). Client voices: Youth, parent and relative perspectives on Family Finding (Publication No. 2013–23). Bethesda, MD: Child Trends. Retrieved from http://familyfinding.org/resourcesandpublications.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodie, K. (2008). Family group conference: An exploratory study describing the relationship between an internal agency environment and the process. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Howard University, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, H., Carr, N., & Whelan, S. (2011). “Like walking on eggshells”: Service user views and expectations of the child protection system. Child and Family Social Work, 16(1), 101–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burford, G. (2000). Advancing innovations: Family Group Decision Making as community-centered child and family work. Protecting Children, 16(3), 4–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burford, G., Connolly, M., Morris, K., & Pennell, J. (2010). Family engagement strategies in child welfare international review: Annotated bibliography. American Humane Association. Retrieved from http://www.americanhumane.org/protecting-children/programs/family-group-decision-making.

  • California Evidence-Based Clearing House for Child Welfare (2012a). Family Finding. Retrieved from http://www.cebc4cw.org/program/family-finding/detailed

  • California Evidence-Based Clearing House for Child Welfare (2012b.). Family Group Decision Making (FGDM). Retrieved from http://www.cebc4cw.org/program/family-group-decision-making/

  • California Permanency for Youth Project. (2007). Definition of permanency/permanent lifelong connection. Retrieved from http://www.senecacenter.org/perm_permanency_def

  • Campbell, K. (2005a). Goals of Family Finding. Used with permission by the Pennsylvania Child Welfare Training Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K. (2005b). Six steps for family finding. Center for Family Finding and Youth Connectedness. Retrieved from http://www.senecacenter.org/familyfinding/resources

  • Campbell, K. (2010). Basic family finding practice scaffold. National Institute for Permanent Family Connectedness, Seneca Center. Retrieved from http://www.senecacenter.org/familyfinding/resources

  • Campbell, K. D. (2011). Family Finding Quality/Fidelity Index, Version 4. Retrieved from http://www.iowacourtsonline.org/wfdata/frame11866-2115/File3.pdf

  • Casey Family Programs. (2011). Ensuring safe, nurturing and permanent families for children: Foster care reductions and child safety. Seattle, WA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.casey.org.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catholic Community Services of Western Washington and EMQ Children and Family Services. (2008). Family search and engagement: A comprehensive practice guide. Retrieved from http://www.ccsww.org/site/DocServer/Family_Search_and_Engagement_Guide_CCS-EMQ.pdf?docID=641

  • Ceballo, R., & McLoyd, V. C. (2002). Social support and parenting in poor, dangerous neighborhoods. Child Development, 73(4), 1310–1321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Center for Social Services Research. (2004). The California Title IV-E child welfare waiver demonstration study evaluation: Final report May 31, 2004. Retrieved from http://cssr.berkeley.edu/childwelfare/projectdetails.asp?name=waiver

  • Chamberlain, P., Price, J. M., Reid, J. B., Landsverk, J., Fisher, P. A., & Stoolmiller, M. (2006). Who disrupts from placement in foster and kinship care? Child Abuse & Neglect, 30(4), 409–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2010). Family engagement. Retrieved from http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/f_fam_engagement/

  • Children’s Defense Fund. (2010). Promising approaches in child welfare: Helping connect children and youth in foster care to permanent family and relationships through Family Finding and engagement. Retrieved from http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data-publications/data/promising-approaches.pdf

  • Connolly, M. (2006). Up front and personal: Confronting dynamics in the family group conference. Family Process, 45(3), 345–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coohey, C., & Zang, Y. (2006). The role of men in chronic supervisory neglect. Child Maltreatment, 11(1), 27–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Courtney, M. E., Terao, S., & Bost, N. (2004). Midwest evaluation of the adult functioning of former foster youth: Conditions of youth preparing to leave state care. Chicago: University of Chicago, Chapin Hall Center for Children. Retrieved from http://www.chapinhall.uchicago.edu.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crampton, D. (2007). Research review: Family group decision-making: A Promising practice in need of more programme theory and research. Child and Family Social Work, 12(2), 202–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crampton, D. S., Crea, T. M., Abramson-Madden, A., & Usher, C. L. (2008). Challenges of street-level child welfare reform and technology transfer: The case of team decision making. Families in Society, 89(4), 512–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crampton, D., & Jackson, W. (2007). Family group decision making and disproportionality in foster care: A case study. Child Welfare, 86(3), 52–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crea, T. M., & Berzin, S. C. (2009). Family involvement in child welfare decision-making: Strategies and research on inclusive practices. Journal of Public Child Welfare, 3, 305–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crosier, T., Butterworth, P., & Rodgers, B. (2007). Mental health problems among single and partnered mothers: The role of financial hardship and social support. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 42(1), 6–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dale, P. (2004). “Like in a fish bowl”: Parents’ perceptions of child protection services. Child Abuse Review, 13(2), 137–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darlington, Y., Healy, K., Yellowlees, J., & Bosly, F. (2012). Parents’ perceptions of their participation in mandated family group meetings. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(2), 331–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, K., & Berry, M. (2002). Engaging families in child welfare services: An evidence-based approach to best practice. Child Welfare, 81(2), 293–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeGarmo, D. S., & Forgatch, M. S. (2005). Early development of delinquency within divorced families: Evaluating a randomized preventive intervention trial. Developmental Science, 3, 229–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diorio, W. (1992). Parental perceptions of the authority of public child welfare caseworkers. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 4, 222–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumbrill, G. (2006). Parental experience of child protection intervention: A qualitative study. Child Abuse and Neglect, 30(1), 27–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, W. J. (2005). Prison, fathers, and identity: A theory of how incarceration affects men’s paternal identity. Fathering, 3(3), 201–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edin, K., & Kissane, R. J. (2010). Poverty and the American family: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 460–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, M., Tinworth, K., Burford, G., & Pennell, J. (2007). Family team meeting (FTM) process, outcome and impact evaluation phase II report. Englewood, CO: American Humane Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farmer, E. (2009). How do placements in kinship care compare with those in non-kin foster care: Placement patterns, progress and outcomes? Child & Family Social Work, 14(3), 331–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feder, A., Alonso, A., Tang, M., Liriano, W., Warner, V., Pilowsky, D., & Weissman, M. M. (2009). Children of low-income depressed mothers: Psychiatric disorders and social adjustment. Depression and Anxiety, 26(6), 513–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, H. H. (2001). Promoting child protection, welfare and healing: The case for developing best practice. Child & Family Social Work, 6(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Figley, C. R. (Ed.). (1995). Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized. New York: Brunner/Mazel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, M., Smith, M., Wosu, H., Stewart, J., Hunter, S., Cree, V. E., & Wilkinson, H. (2011). Engaging with families in child protection: Lessons from practitioner research in Scotland. Child Welfare, 90(4), 117–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, E. (2011). Jasmine Winters, 18, is outgrowing foster are, but is leaving with family-like support network. The Patriot News, July 7. Retrieved from http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/07/jasmine_winters_18_is_outgrowi.html

  • Haight, W., Black, J., Mangelsdorf, S., Giorgio, G., Tata, L., Schoppe, S., & Szewczyk, M. (2002). Making visits better: The perspectives of parents, foster parents, and child welfare workers. Child Welfare, 81(2), 173–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haight, W. L., Mangelsdorf, S., Black, J., Szewczyk, M., Schoppe, S., Giorgio, G., & Tata, L. (2005). Enhancing parent–child interaction during foster care visits: Experimental assessment of an intervention. Child Welfare, 84(4), 459–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, A. (1988). Foreword. In R.A. Dorfman (Ed.), (pp. vii–ix). New York: Bruner/Mazel

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassall, I. (1996). Origin and development of family group conferences. In J. Hudson, A. Morris, G. Maxwell, & B. Galaway (Eds.), Family group conferences: Perspectives on policy and practice (pp. 17–36). Monsey, NY: Willow Tree Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, D. (2005). The 3-5-7 model: Preparing children for permanency. Children and Youth Services Review, 27, 197–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hepworth, D. H., Rooney, R. H., Rooney, G. D., Strom-Gottfried, K., & Larsen, J. (2010). Direct social work practice: Theory and skills (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt, N. M., Crane, B., & Mooney, B. (2010). The Family Development Credential Program: A synthesis of outcome research on an empowerment-based human service training program. Families in Society, 91(1), 76–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, J., Morris, A., Maxwell, G., & Galaway, N. (Eds.). (1996). Family group conferences: Perspectives on policy and practice. Monsey, NY: Willow Tree Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of the Red Cross. (2009). Restoring family links strategy including legal references. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Rescue Committee. (2003). Family reunification, alternative care and community reintegration of separated children in post-conflict Rwanda. New York: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jack, S. M., DiCenso, A., & Lohfeld, L. (2005). A theory of maternal engagement with public health users and family visitors. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 49(2), 182–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, S., Landsverk, J., & Slymen, D. J. (2004). Placement movement in out-of-home care: Patterns and predictors. Children and Youth Services Review, 26(2), 185–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, W. E. (2001). Paternal involvement among unwed fathers. Children and Youth Services Review, 23(6–7), 513–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landsman, M. D., & Boel-Studt, S. (2011). Fostering families’ and children’s rights to family connections. Child Welfare, 90(4), 19–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magennis, R., & Smith, D. B. (2005). All used up: Factors associated with burnout among Missouri social service workers. Missouri Electronic Journal of Sociology, 5, 1–33. Retrieved from http://www.mosoc.org/MEJS/mejs.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallon, G. P. (2011). Meaningful family engagement. Child Welfare, 90(4), 5–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malm, K., & Allen, T. (2011). Family Finding: Does implementation differ when serving different child welfare populations? (Publication No. 2011–27). Washington, DC: Child Trends.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maluccio, A. N., & Daly, J. (2000). Family group conferences as “good” child welfare practice. In G. Burford & J. Hudson (Eds.), Family group conferencing: New directions in community-centered child and family practice (pp. 65–71). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBeath, B., Briggs, H. E., & Aisenberg, E. (2009). The role of child welfare managers in promoting agency performance through experimentation. Children and Youth Services Review, 31, 112–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merkel-Holguin, L. (2003). Promising results, potential new directions: International FGDM research and evaluation in child welfare [Special issue]. Protecting Children, 18(1–2), 2–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosley, J. & Smith, D. B. (2004). A preliminary evaluation of the Missouri Family Development Training and Credentialing Program. Retrieved from http://ipp.missouri.edu/files/ipp/attachments/a_preliminary_evaluation_of_the_missouri_family_development_training_and_credentialing_program.pdf

  • National Resource Center for Family Centered Practice and Permanency Planning and the California Permanency for Youth Project (n.d.). Six steps to find a family: A practical guide to family search and engagement. Written by Mardith J. Louisell. Retrieved from http://www.nrcpfc.org/downloads/SixSteps.pdf

  • O’Donnell, J. M., Johnson, W. E., D’Aunno, L. E., & Thornton, H. L. (2005). Fathers in child welfare: Caseworkers’ perspectives. Child Welfare, 84(3), 387–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ollendick, T. H., & King, N. J. (2012). Evidence-based treatments for children and adolescents: Issues and commentary. In P. C. Kendall (Ed.), Child and adolescent therapy: Cognitive-behavioral approaches (4th ed., pp. 499–519). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, K. B. (2009). Family group conferencing and child protection mediation: Essential tools for prioritizing family engagement in child welfare cases. Family Court Review, 47(1), 53–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennell, J. (2005a). Widening the circle. In J. Pennell & G. Anderson (Eds.), Widening the circle: The practice and evolution of family group conferencing with children, youths, and their families (pp. 1–8). Washington, DC: NASW Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennell, J. (2005b). Before the conference-promoting family leadership. In J. Pennell & G. Anderson (Eds.), Widening the circle: The practice and evolution of family group conferencing with children, youths, and their families (pp. 13–32). Washington, DC: NASW Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennell, J., & Anderson, G. (2005). Preface. In J. Pennell & G. Anderson (Eds.), Widening the circle: The practice and evolution of family group conferencing with children, youths, and their families (p. xi). Washington, DC: NASW Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennell, J., & Burford, G. (2000). Family group decision making and family violence. In G. Burford & J. Hudson (Eds.), Family group conferencing: New directions in community-centered child and family practice (pp. 171–185). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennell, J., Edwards, M., & Burford, G. (2010). Expedited family group engagement and child permanency. Children and Youth Services Review, 32(7), 1012–1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennell, J. (with the assistance of Hardison, J., & Yerkes, E.). (1999). North Carolina Family Group Conferencing Project: Building partnerships with and around families: Report to the North Carolina Division of Social Services, Fiscal year 1998–1999. Raleigh: North Carolina State University, Social Work Program, North Carolina Family Group Conferencing Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlman, H. H. (1957). Social casework. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrino, T., Coatsworth, J. D., Briones, E., Pantin, H., & Szapocznik, J. (2001). Initial engagement in parent-centered preventive interventions: A family systems perspective. Journal of Primary Prevention, 22(1), 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, L. J., Van Dusen Randazzo, K., Litrownik, A. J., Newton, R. R., Davis, I. P., & Villodas, M. (2011). Factors associated with caregiver stability in permanent placements: A classification tree approach. Child Abuse & Neglect, 35(6), 425–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15, 121–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rauktis, M. E. (2008). Family Group Decision Making: A profile of practices in Pennsylvania 2008. University of Pittsburgh, Child Welfare Training Program. Retrieved from http://www.pacwcbt.pitt.edu/FGDM_EvaluationPage.htm

  • Rauktis, M. E., Huefner, J., & Cahalane, H. (2011). Perceptions of fidelity to family group decision making principles: Examining the impact of race, gender and relationship. Child Welfare, 90(4), 41–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauktis, M. E., McCarthy, S., Krackhardt, D., & Cahalane, H. G. (2010). Innovation in child welfare: The adoption and implementation of Family Group Decision Making in Pennsylvania. Children and Youth Services Review, 32(5), 732–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risley-Curtiss, C., & Heffernan, K. (2003). Gender biases in child welfare. Affilia, 18(4), 395–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rooney, R. H. (2009). Strategies for work with involuntary clients (2nd ed.). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D., Downes, K. J., O’Reilly, A. L. R., Mekonnen, R., Luan, X., & Localio, R. (2008). Impact of kinship care on behavioral well-being for children in out-of-home care. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 162(6), 550–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, M., Kreppner, J., & O’Conner, T. G. (2001). Specificity and heterogeneity in children’s responses to profound institutional privation. British Journal of Psychiatry, 179, 97–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saleebey, D. (Ed.). (1997). The strengths perspective in social work practice (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheets, J., Wittenstrom, K., Fong, R., James, J., Tecci, M., Baumann, D. J., & Rodriguez, C. (2009). Evidence-based practice in family group decision-making for Anglo, African American and Hispanic families. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(11), 1187–1191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shore, N., Wirth, J., Cahn, K., Yancey, B., & Gunderson, K. (2002). Long term and immediate outcomes of family group conferencing in Washington state (June 2001). Retrieved from http://www.iirp.edu/iirpWebsites/web/uploads/article_pdfs/fgcwash.pdf

  • Smith, D. B. (2009). Change in frontline family workers’ burnout and job satisfaction: Evaluating the Missouri Family Development Credential Program. Professional Development: The International Journal of Continuing Social Work Education, 12(1), 51–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. B., McCarthy, M., Hill, J. N., & Mosley, J. (2007). Changes in frontline family workers: Results from the Missouri Family Development Credential program evaluation. University of Missouri-Kansas City Family Studies Program Research Report 2007–01. Retrieved from http://www.fdc-pa.org/resources/MO_research_article.pdf

  • Sprang, G., Craig, C., & Clark, J. (2011). Secondary traumatic stress and burnout in child welfare workers: A comparative analysis of occupational distress across professional groups. Child Welfare, 90(6), 149–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spratt, T., & Callan, J. (2004). Parents’ views on social work interventions in child welfare cases. British Journal of Social Work, 34(2), 199–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strega, S., Fleet, C., Brown, L., Dominelli, L., Callahan, M., & Walmsley, C. (2008). Connecting father absence and mother blame in child welfare policies and practice. Children and Youth Services Review, 30(7), 705–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sue, D. W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • TriWest Group (2012). Family connections demonstration project final progress report. Submitted to Catholic Family and Child Service by Tonya Aultman-Bettridge and Peter Selby. Boulder, CO: author. Retrieved from http://familyfinding.org/resourcesandpublications.html

  • UN General Assembly, Convention on the Rights of the Child, 20 November 1989, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1577, p.3, available at: http://www.unhcr.org.refworld/docid/3ae6b38f0.html

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Children’s Bureau. (2013). The AFCARS Report. Preliminary FY 2012 estimates as of July 2013(20). Retrieved from: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/afcarsreport20.pdf

  • Wang, E. W., Lambert, M. C., Johnson, L. E., Boudreau, B., Breidenbach, R., & Baumann, D. (2012). Expediting permanent placement from foster care systems: The role of family group decision making. Children and Youth Services Review, 34(4), 845–850.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watzlawick, P. (1993). The language of change: Elements of therapeutic communication. New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weigensburg, E. C., Barth, R. P., & Guo, S. (2009). Family group decision making: A propensity score analysis to evaluate child and family services at baseline and after 36-months. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(3), 383–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisz, V., Korpas, A., & Wingrove, T. (2006). Nebraska family group conferencing: Evaluation report. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska, UN-L Center on Children, Families, and the Law, Nebraska Court Improvement Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, S. C., Malm, K., Allen, T., & Ellis, R. (2011). Bringing family to the table: Tips and techniques for effective family engagement (Publication No. 2011–32). Washington, DC: Child Trends. Retrieved from http://familyfinding.org/resourcesandpublications.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yatchmenoff, D. (2005). Measuring client engagement from the client’s perspective in nonvoluntary child protective services. Research on Social Work Practice, 15(2), 84–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahn, M., & Pandy, S. (2004). Economic well-being of single mothers: Work first or postsecondary education? Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 31(3), 87–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, M. A. (2000). Empowerment theory: Psychological, organizational and community levels of analysis. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology (pp. 43–63). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Gene Detter, Wendy Unger, and Rob Winesickle of the Pennsylvania Child Welfare Resource Center for their contributions to this chapter.

The case of Carla was adapted from the story of Jasmine Winters, written by Elizabeth Gibson of The Patriot-News, Mechanicsburg, PA. The authors thank Eva Domalski of Dauphin County Children and Youth Services for her work with Jasmine.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Child Welfare Education and Research Programs, School of Social Work, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Helen Cahalane

  2. Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Carol M. Anderson

Authors
  1. Helen Cahalane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carol M. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helen Cahalane .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Child Welfare Education and Research Programs, School of Social Work, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA

    Helen Cahalane

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cahalane, H., Anderson, C.M. (2013). Family Engagement Strategies in Child Welfare Practice. In: Cahalane, H. (eds) Contemporary Issues in Child Welfare Practice. Contemporary Social Work Practice. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8627-5_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation