Search

Restoration of Aboriginal children (also called reunification) is an under-researched area despite being the preferred permanency outcome for children. To investigate the rate of restoration for Aboriginal children, the factors that influence restoration, and to explore the experiences of parents whose Aboriginal children have been restored, and their children. Analyses were conducted using data from the NSW Department of Communities and Justice Pathways of Care Longitudinal Study (POCLS). The quantitative sample includes all Aboriginal children in NSW who were on final Children's Court care and protection orders by 30 April 2013. Qualitative data were extracted from the POCLS survey instruments. Of the 1018 Aboriginal children in the study, 15.2% were restored. Around 40 % of children entered care following just one (or no) substantiated Risk of Significant Harm reports. Children entering care under the age of 2 years were the least likely to be restored. Parents expressed dissatisfaction with child protection agencies and family support services both at the time their child was removed and in the restoration period. Parents and children expressed the importance of being supported to maintain family relationships while children are in care. Despite policy priorities to the contrary, few Aboriginal children are considered for restoration. More support is needed for Aboriginal parents interfacing with all stages of the care system and following restoration. Additional research is needed to understand the factors underlying decisions to remove Aboriginal children from their families and whether restoration to their family is considered or achieved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Australian Social Work is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study reports on a series of qualitative interviews with professionals in Shanghai, China who work with children. The interviews explored the awareness of child protection issues amongst a range of people who work with children, how they differentiate corporal punishment from maltreatment and what they would do in response to cases of child abuse. Shanghai has one of the most well developed child welfare systems in China, and compared to similar professionals in other cities, those in Shanghai had higher awareness and more training, but were nevertheless reluctant to intervene and did not feel well prepared to deal with cases of child abuse should they be encountered. However there are some indications that practice is improving, and examples of recent developments are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To address the need for empirical evidence on how culture is and should be addressed in child protection work in Australia to ensure equity in service delivery, this study reviewed 120 case files of children from ethnic-minority, Aboriginal, and Anglo backgrounds and conducted 46 qualitative interviews with ethnic-minority client families and the caseworkers who service them. Overall, the results indicated that the issue of culture for ethnic-minority families receives less consideration than it does for Aboriginal families and more than it does for Anglo families, indicating that cross-cultural parity is yet to be achieved. To ensure equity in service delivery, it is important that culture is neither overlooked nor used to essentialize the needs and experiences of ethnic-minority families; balancing the amount of attention that culture receives in child protection work may help “normalize the novel”—that is, reduce the use of cultural stereotypes without reducing the significance of cultural factors in child protection work with culturally nonmainstream families. Mandatory consultation with “multicultural” caseworkers may help get the balance right and warrants future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Restoring children from out‐of‐home care (OOHC) to their families is the preferred outcome for all children removed by child protection services, yet little is known about how restoration processes are experienced by families and services supporting them. This paper provides important insights about Aboriginal child restoration from 40 practitioners and stakeholders at a community forum led by Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations in regional New South Wales (NSW), Australia. This is one component of larger Aboriginal‐led research, which investigates child protection experiences and pathways to successful restoration in NSW and the data source for this paper. The community forum explored the issues for families navigating family preservation, OOHC and restoration within child protection and legal systems. Findings include the need for a continuum of support for families throughout their engagement with child protection systems and crucially following the removal of their children. Barriers to effective restoration practice included a lack of access to meaningful and ongoing preservation services, insufficient cultural care planning and family finding efforts that are often too late, the pressure on services to support families without adequate capabilities or enough resourcing, the lack of transparency and the complexities in navigating the restoration process, and the lack of culturally informed support for children and their families while children are in care. Implications for policy and practice are discussed. This paper contributes to understanding practice, processes and barriers for restoration, particularly focused on the perspectives of Aboriginal families and communities, with potential insights for practice within Australia and internationally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cross-agency administrative data can improve cost-effective triage systems for child protection and other human service delivery. To determine the minimum set of cross-agency indicators that could accurately classify placement in out-of-home-care (OOHC) before age 13–14 years. Participants were 72,079 Australian children (mean age = 13.16 years; SD = 0.37; 51.4% male) and their parents, for whom linked administrative records spanning the years 1994–2016 were available for analysis within the 'New South Wales Child Development Study'. First, a series of logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between cross-agency (health, justice, education) risk indicators and membership of the sub-cohort of 1239 children who had an OOHC placement prior to age 13–14 years, relative to (1) the sub-cohort of 55,473 children who had no previous contact with child protection services, and (2) the sub-cohort of 15,367 children who had been reported to child protection services but had no record of OOHC placement. We then explored the classification characteristics associated with a smaller combination of risk factors, and the utility of specific familial risk factors, for classifying membership of the OOHC subgroup. A combination of six risk indicators evident before OOHC placement can classify children placed in OOHC with approximately 95% accuracy, and the presence of at least four of these risk indicators provides excellent specificity (99.6%). A combination of risk factors observable in administrative datasets held by multiple government agencies may be used to target support services to prevent entry into OOHC for children from vulnerable families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]