A procedure for assessing parents' capacity for change in child protection cases

被引:37
|
作者
Harnett, Paul H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Queensland, Sch Psychol, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia
关键词
child abuse; child protection; evidence-based assessment; capacity-to-change;
D O I
10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.04.005
中图分类号
D669 [社会生活与社会问题]; C913 [社会生活与社会问题];
学科分类号
1204 ;
摘要
Decisions of critical importance to families include whether children should be removed from or reunified with their natural parents. Practitioners working in the child protection field contribute to these decisions by assessing the capacity of parents to meet the needs of their children. A cross-sectional assessment of families provides important information about family functioning at one point in time, but is of limited usefulness when the results are equivocal. The assessment of a family's capacity-to-change provides additional information not possible in a cross-sectional assessment, including an evaluation of the parent's motivation and capacity to acquire parenting skills. An assessment of capacity-to-change includes: 1) carrying out a cross-sectional assessment of the parents' current functioning, 2) specifying operationally defined targets for change, 3) implementing an intervention with proven efficacy for the client group with a focus on achieving identified targets for change, and 4) the objective measurement of progress over time including evaluation of the parents' willingness to engage and cooperate with the intervention and the extent to which targets were achieved. The aim of the capacity-to-change through intervention is to determine whether a family has the potential to eventually achieve a minimal level of parenting. Presented is a detailed description of the capacity-to-change procedure and a discussion of related professional issues. Crown Copyright (c) 2007 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1179 / 1188
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Child protection and justice systems processing of serious child abuse and neglect cases
    Sedlak, AJ
    Schultz, D
    Wells, SJ
    Lyons, P
    Doueck, HJ
    Gragg, F
    CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT, 2006, 30 (06) : 657 - 677
  • [32] Parents' experiences with child protection during pregnancy and post-birth
    Trew, Sebastian
    Taplin, Stephanie
    O'Donnell, Melissa
    Marriott, Rhonda
    Broadhurst, Karen
    CHILD & FAMILY SOCIAL WORK, 2023, 28 (02) : 549 - 562
  • [33] Assessing Capacity to Change in High-Risk Pregnant Women: A Pilot Study
    Harnett, Paul H.
    Barlow, Jane
    Coe, Chris
    Newbold, Caroline
    Dawe, Sharon
    CHILD ABUSE REVIEW, 2018, 27 (01) : 72 - 84
  • [34] Mandatory reporting for child protection in health settings and the rights of parents with disabilities
    Mudrick, Nancy R.
    Smith, Carrie Jefferson
    DISABILITY AND HEALTH JOURNAL, 2017, 10 (02) : 165 - 168
  • [35] Parental engagement in child protection assessment practice: Voices from parents
    Lehtme, Rafaela
    Toros, Karmen
    CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES REVIEW, 2020, 113
  • [36] Balancing child participation and protection in emergency cases: Ensuring the child's best interests
    Gresdahl, May
    Fauske, Halvor
    Storhaug, Anita Skarstad
    CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES REVIEW, 2025, 172
  • [37] Doing Child-Protection Social Work with Parents: What Are the Barriers in Practice?
    Wilkins, David
    Whittaker, Charlotte
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK, 2018, 48 (07) : 2003 - 2019
  • [38] Does the gender of mentally ill parents bias risk assessments in child protection?
    Raadts-Misegaes, Stefan
    RECHT & PSYCHIATRIE, 2015, 33 (03): : 123 - 131
  • [39] Resistant Parents and Child Protection: Knowledge Base, Pointers for Practice and Implications for Policy
    Tuck, Vic
    CHILD ABUSE REVIEW, 2013, 22 (01) : 5 - 19
  • [40] Notifying Neglect: Child Protection as an Application of Bureaucratic Power against Marginalized Parents
    Rice, James
    Sigurjonsdottir, Hanna Bjorg
    HUMAN ORGANIZATION, 2018, 77 (02) : 112 - 121