Contributors to Reunification or Permanent Out-of-Home Care for Physically Abused Children

Barth, Richard P.; Snowden, Lonnie R.; Broeck, Elsa Ten; Clancy, Tom; Jordan, Catheleen; Barusch, Amanda S.

doi:10.1300/j079v09n02_03

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The group of eight counties with the highest entry rates evidenced, on average, higher levels of economic disadvantage compared to groups of counties with moderate and low entry rates. This finding is consistent with prior research at the individual, family and neighborhood levels relative to the relationship between poverty and foster care (Barth et al, 1985;Courtney, 1994;Ehrle-Macomber et al, 2004;Glisson et al, 2000;Kortenkamp et al, 2004;Seaberg & Tolley, 1986;Wells & Guo, 1999;2004). These same measures, though, did not help explain why some counties evidenced longer stays for children.…”

Section: Social Structural Findingssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Of the maltreated children who enter foster care, the most common reason is neglect. Other descriptive data about children and their families leave little doubt that there is a link between foster care use and economic disadvantage, minority status, and single-parenthood (Barth et al, 1985;Courtney, 1994;Ehrle-Macomber, Scarcella, & Geen, 2004;Glisson et al, 2000;Kortenkamp, Geen, & Stagner, 2004;Seaberg & Tolley, 1986;Wells & Guo, 1999;2004), though little is known about why this link exists.…”

Section: Variability In Foster Care Utilization: Knowledge Basementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four county level social structural variables, economic disadvantage, residential mobility, family structure, and racial and ethnic heterogeneity, were included in the study given the evidence from prior research at the individual level that these are established risk factors related to foster care use (Barth et al, 1985;Courtney, 1994;Ehrle-Macomber et al, 2004;Glisson et al, 2000;Kortenkamp et al, 2004;Seaberg & Tolley, 1986;Wells & Guo, 1999;2004). All of the data used to measure these factors was derived from year 2000 county-level census data.…”

Section: Place-specific Social Structural Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Differences in Foster Care Utilization Among Non-Urban Counties

Piccola¹,

Crampton

2009

Journal of Public Child Welfare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research demonstrates that foster care utilization varies across different geographic areas and recent growth in use has occurred in non-urban areas. This article examines patterns of non-urban foster care utilization and the extent to which differences in utilization are related to person, situation, and placespecific characteristics. While some variability in utilization was related to social structural characteristics of counties, differences among counties in foster care use for adolescents and children with behavior problems accounted for higher rates of variability. The implications of these findings are discussed, as well as their relevance in developing strategies to promote appropriate use of foster care.

show abstract

Section: Social Structural Findingssupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Variability In Foster Care Utilization: Knowledge Basementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Place-specific Social Structural Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Differences in Foster Care Utilization Among Non-Urban Counties

Piccola¹,

Crampton

2009

Journal of Public Child Welfare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, families with a decreased likelihood of reunification are those that have income problems (Barth et al, 1987;Courtney, 1994;Jones, 1998); parents with less than a high school education; unemployed parents (Westat, Inc., 2001); and children with health problems or disabilities (Courtney, 1994;McMurty & Lie, 1992;Wells & Guo, 1999). Yet these characteristics also describe the general child welfare population.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors Predicting Family Reunification for African American, Latino, Asian and White Families in the Child Welfare System

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined child, family and system-related factors associated with reunification across African American, Latino, Asian and White families involved in the child welfare system in one large and ethnically diverse California County. Data were obtained from extensive reviews of child welfare case records and multivariate analysis was performed on a wide array of variables not found in previous research. Results indicated that when taking other factors into account, ethnicity was not a strong predictor of reunification. Factors that predicted reunification varied across ethnic groups, with none of the predictors being significant for the Asian group. Implications and suggestions for further research are discussed.

show abstract

“…The child factors associated with lower rates of reunification include being either an infant or adolescent, being black, and having been removed for neglect. 21,[27][28][29][30][31][32][33] The 2 family-of-origin factors associated with lower rates of reunification include lack of parental visitation while children are in foster care and family poverty. 21,26 -32,34,35 Finally, the child welfare variables associated with lower rates of reunification include longer time in out-of-home care and having been placed with a relative.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Children Who Return Home From Foster Care: A 6-Year Prospective Study of Behavioral Health Outcomes in Adolescence

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Objective. Returning children to their biological families after placement in foster care (ie, reunification) has been prioritized with legislation. Comprehensive studies of child behavioral health functioning after reunification, however, have not been conducted. This study examined outcomes for youth who were reunified after placement in foster care as compared with youth who did not reunify.Design. Prospective cohort. Setting. Children who entered foster care in San Diego, California, and who remained in foster care for at least 5 months.Participants. A cohort of 149 ethnically diverse youth, 7 to 12 years old, who entered foster care between May 1990, and October 1991. Seventy-five percent of those interviewed at Time 1 were interviewed at Time 2 (6 years later).Outcome Measures. 1) Risk behaviors: delinquent, sexual, self-destructive, substance use, and total risk behaviors; 2) Life-course outcomes: pregnancy, tickets/arrests, suspensions, dropping out of school, and grades; 3) Current symptomatology: externalizing, internalizing, total behavior problems, and total competence.Results. Compared with youth who were not reunified, reunified youth showed more self-destructive behavior (0.15 vs ؊0.11), substance use (0.16 vs ؊0.11), and total risk behavior problem standardized scores (0.12 vs ؊0.09). Reunified youth were more likely to have received a ticket or have been arrested (49.2% vs 30.2%), to have dropped out of school (20.6% vs 9.4%), and to have received lower grades (6.5 vs 7.4). Reunified youth reported more current problems in internalizing behaviors (56.6 vs 53.0), and total behavior problems (59.5 vs 55.7), and lower total competence (41.1 vs 45.0). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups on delinquency, sexual behaviors, pregnancy, suspensions, or externalizing behaviors. Reunification status was a significant predictor of negative outcomes in 8 of the 9 regression equations after controlling for Time 1 behavior problems, age, and gender.Conclusions. These findings suggest that youth who reunify with their biological families after placement in foster care have more negative outcomes than youth who do not reunify. The implications of these findings for policy and practice are discussed. Pediatrics 2001;108(1). URL: http://www.pediatrics.org/cgi/content/full/108/1/ e10; foster care, risk behaviors, child abuse, adolescence.ABBREVIATIONS. SD, standard deviation; CBCL, Child Behavior Checklist.C hildren entering foster care have high rates of emotional, behavioral, developmental, and physical health problems and are in need of many specialized services. [1][2][3][4][5][6] In one California study, children in foster care comprised Ͻ4% of Medi-Cal-eligible children, but accounted for 41% of all children who used Medi-Cal mental health services. 7 The limited long-term research on children in foster care suggests that they are at risk for continued difficulties, including not finishing high school, incarceration, and chronic problems with employment and housing....

show abstract

Contributors to Reunification or Permanent Out-of-Home Care for Physically Abused Children

Cited by 11 publications

References 3 publications

Differences in Foster Care Utilization Among Non-Urban Counties

Differences in Foster Care Utilization Among Non-Urban Counties

Factors Predicting Family Reunification for African American, Latino, Asian and White Families in the Child Welfare System

Children Who Return Home From Foster Care: A 6-Year Prospective Study of Behavioral Health Outcomes in Adolescence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About