A qualitative study on the pros and cons of ethnically matching culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) client families and child protection caseworkers

Abstract

A qualitative study on the pros and cons of ethnically matching culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) client families and child protection caseworkers Abstract A review of the literature indicated that empirical research into the advantages and disadvantages of ethnically matching child protection caseworkers and culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) client families is not extensive. The main aim of this study was to address this gap. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 29 CALD client families and 17 child protection caseworkers (as part of a larger study). It was found that if CALD families fear a breach of confidentiality (because of cultural reasons to protect the family's privacy and name), and this fear exceeds the two main benefits of ethnic matchingnamely, that it helps overcome language barriers and provides (cultural) sensitivitythen they are likely to prefer a non-matched caseworker. This may be a challenge in child protection practice if the pool of culturally competent caseworkers is small. Another challenge identified was when CALD families preferred an ethnic match but was seen by case managers as a risk to the accurate assessment of a child's wellbeing because the caseworker was over-identifying with the client family. Thus, the provision of a culturally sensitive service can be at odds with the need to protect children from harm. This issue is seen as best addressed on a case by case basis. This study is significant because it has shown that 'over-identification' is an important work practice issue in this matter. It has also used empirical evidence to inform best practice principles regarding ethnic matching.

Recommendations for Improving Cultural Competency When Working with Ethnic Minority Families in Child Protection Systems in Australia

“…Offer client families an ethnically-matched caseworker: Some families may prefer to have a matched caseworker because they believe they will understand their culture better or because they have to for language reasons. However, other families may prefer to have a non-matched caseworker if they fear that a matched caseworker would disclose their family's private affairs to their community, which in turn would result in family shame and 'loss of face' (Sawrikar 2013a). Thus, it is important to offer choice to client families about whether they prefer a matched or non-matched worker.…”

Under What Conditions Does Caseworker-Caregiver Racial/Ethnic Similarity Matter for Housing Service Provision? An Application of Representative Bureaucracy Theory

“…Research is needed to understand the ways in which caseworkers’ cultural knowledge, willingness, and ability to actively represent diverse client groups and/or use different client engagement practices shapes frontline practice and in turn, service access and quality. Evidence from qualitative studies suggests that non-Caucasian caseworkers serving same-race families may fear breaches of confidentiality and may face challenges in reconciling their cultural identity with their formal organizational roles (Watkins-Hayes 2009; Sawrikar 2013), implying that the benefits of frontline racial/ethnic matching should be considered in relation to potential costs for caseworkers, caregivers, and agencies. Research reflecting these concerns might explore how minority and majority caseworkers balance their often-intersecting social identities (i.e., race, ethnicity, and gender) with their formal organizational roles (Watkins-Hayes 2009; 2011).…”

“…Research finds that minority bureaucrats sharing the race/ethnicity of their clients are more likely to hold similar preferences for public programs and policies than culturally different bureaucrats and clients, implying that minority bureaucrats may more accurately translate minority client preferences into action (Bradbury and Kellough 2008). This knowledge-to-action process may benefit from practitioners’ use of culturally informed language and knowledge of cultural symbols, the development of a culturally centered therapeutic alliance, and the promotion of treatment goals and service plans reflecting client cultural preferences (Bernal and Sáez-Santiago 2006; Sawrikar 2013). Finally, passive representation may be translated to action specifically when minority bureaucrats adopt a representational role, and connect their practice efforts to desired policy outcomes by actively representing minority group interests (Sowa and Selden 2003; Bradbury and Kellough 2008).…”

The treatment needs of victims/survivors of child sexual abuse (CSA) from ethnic minority communities: A literature review and suggestions for practice

“…Another component of cultural competency is the routine provision of training by management to all staff in service organisations (Sawrikar, 2017). This is because ethnic diversity in the populace means that all workers will need knowledge about different others (Nesci, 2006;Sawrikar, 2013;Tishelman & Geffner, 2010). To address staff turnover and the need for knowledge about new and emerging groups, this training should be provided regularly (Sawrikar, 2017).…”