Adoption and guardianship: A moderated mediation analysis of predictors of post-permanency continuity.

Abstract

The original thinking behind permanency planning for foster children was to secure a caregiver's intention to provide a permanent home, not to guarantee it. Little is known, however, about how intentions change after permanence or what effect this change has on post-permanency continuity of care. This study examined the mediating effects of caregivers' thoughts about ending an adoption or guardianship, and how this mechanism may be contingent on primordial and bureaucratic factors that child welfare agencies rely on to ensure family continuity after legal permanence. In 2006, a sample of 346 Illinois caregivers who finalized an adoption or guardianship between 1998 and 2002 completed surveys about child behavior problems, the adequacy of financial assistance, and thoughts about maintaining the permanency relationship. Responses were linked to administrative data that tracked continuity of care through 2012. Simple mediation and moderated mediation hypotheses of the effects of caregiver thoughts on post-permanency continuity were tested. At last observation, 8% of caregivers were no longer living with the child or stopped receiving subsidies on the child's behalf. Thoughts expressed at survey time about ending the permanency relationship mediated the effect of child behavior problems on post-permanency discontinuity rates. This indirect effect was more pronounced among distantly related kin, lone caregivers, and caregivers who felt the subsidy was inadequate to cover their expenses. Our findings suggest that post-permanency services should target a narrow segment of caregivers who express weakened permanency commitments that arise from the challenges of parenting a child with multiple behavioral problems.

Factors associated with re-entry to out-of-home care among children in England

“…Most recently, an association between more placement moves while in OHC and an increased likelihood of an adoption, special guardianship or residence order breaking down have been described (Selwyn et al, 2014). Studies in other countries have described associations with re-entry to OHC and the child’s age at exit (Orsi, 2015; White, 2016; Yampolskaya, Armstrong, & Vargo, 2007), ethnicity (Orsi, 2015; Shaw, 2006), having behavioral or health problems (Barth, Weigensberg, Fisher, Fetrow, & Green, 2008; Liao & White, 2014; Testa, Snyder, Wu, Rolock, & Liao, 2015; White, 2016; Yampolskaya et al, 2007), a longer time spent in care (McDonald, Bryson, & Poertner, 2006; Wells & Guo, 1999), placement setting (Carnochan, Rizik-Baer, & Austin, 2013; Lee, Jonson-Reid, & Drake, 2012), and placement stability (Carnochan et al, 2013).…”

Post-Permanency Continuity: What Happens After Adoption and Guardianship From Foster Care?

“…These data do not, for example, report on the support system of the child, if they are supported, emotionally or financially, by their birth parents, adoptive parents or legal guardians after state custody. Other studies report that most caregivers state that they have positive feelings towards the children they have adopted or assumed guardianship (Fuller et al, 2006;Testa et al, 2014). From these data it is unclear if the children would report the same feelings, or how those feelings impact continuity in caregiving.…”

“…These data do not provide a reason that the subsidy stops, only the end date of the last payment. However, a systematic spot-check of these cases found that the children were no longer living in the home after the subsidy payment ended (Testa, Snyder, Wu, Rolock, & Liao, 2014). Approximately onethird (N ¼ 361) of these children also experienced the death of at least one caregiver.…”

“…This practice would involve preparing families for the possibility of discontinuity prior to finalization, addressing this with them after legal permanence has been achieved, and ensuring that adoption-and guardianship-competent services and supports are available at the earliest signs of difficulty. New research identified early warning signs that can be used to identify families most at risk of post-permanency discontinuity (Testa et al, 2014). These early warning signs should be tested and verified.…”

El papel de los profesionales en la prevención de rupturas en adopción

“…Si atendemos a los factores del niño encontramos que los factores más claros de riesgo son la mayor edad del menor en el momento de la adopción, los problemas de conducta, especialmente los de tipo externalizante y los problemas en el área de la vinculación. Aunque el estudio de la historia previa del menor es más complejo, también existe cierto acuerdo en cuanto a que la adversidad de la historia previa y el mayor número de cambios en su historia de cuidado son factores que aumentan el riesgo de ruptura (Coakley y Berrick, 2008;Smith, Howard, Garnier y Ryan, 2006;Testa, Snyder, Wu, Rolock y Liao, 2015).…”