State Child Welfare Policy Guide: Part of the Policy Matters Series

2. Preserving and Reunifying Families

Debate within the public domain and the child welfare field has often pitted family preservation/reunification and child safety against each other, framing them as either/or possibilities for vulnerable children. In reality, effective practice aims to both protect the safety of all children and whenever possible to keep them with their families. The goal is to prevent the harm to their development that occurs both when children are abused or neglected and when they are removed from home.

For a child to thrive, the risks he/she experiences must be outweighed by the protective factors within the family, extended family and informal support system, and community, as well as from the formal service system. Typically, the situations of families with children at risk of or in foster care placement are complex; multiple vulnerabilities or problems must be addressed in order for them to safely care for their children and ensure that their children achieve key developments milestones. Many families involved with the child welfare system live in poverty, and they often experience substance abuse problems, mental health disorders, domestic violence, and/or housing issues. Consequently, preventing the need for out-of-home placement is rarely a simple, one-service response. It requires a comprehensive child and family assessment and access to a range of services and supports appropriately tailored to counteract individual family risk factors and to strengthen the family’s protective capacity.

A growing body of rigorous research makes a compelling case for ensuring that each child involved with the child welfare system has every possible opportunity to be raised safely by his or her birth family. A range of services and resources are demonstrated to be effective in enabling parents to protect and nurture their children and in preventing the harm that children experience when separated from their families. At the same time, no single service or intervention is likely to be adequate for addressing families’ complex situations, needs and strengths. To ensure that children are safe and thriving within their families requires a carefully constructed, well-resourced set of policies that support effective services. Anything less will fail to produce optimal outcomes for individual children and the state’s future citizens.

Recently, one of the largest studies ever conducted of the effects of foster care found that children on the margins of placement have better outcomes when they remain at home, especially older children. This study retrospectively examined outcomes for 15,000 school-age children in Illinois from 1990 to 2002. It did not focus on children who were the subjects of reported incidents of extreme abuse or in such danger that all investigators would agree the child should be placed. Instead, the subjects were children who might or might not be placed, depending on the judgment of the child protection investigator assigned to the case and the judicial officer who ruled in the case. T he research revealed that the children who remained with their families had fewer teen births, were less likely to become juvenile delinquents, and were more likely to hold jobs as young adults. [i]

Another study found that maltreated children who remained with their parents experienced significantly fewer behavioral problems than children in foster care . Researchers at the University of Minnesota compared the behavioral development and psychological functioning of three groups of children: those who had lived in foster care, those who had experienced abuse or neglect but remained at home, and children who did not experience foster care or maltreatment. Behavioral problems among children placed in foster care increased immediately following placement in and departure from foster care. Though it comes from a different country and society, a recent study of Romanian children provided further evidence of the benefits of keeping families together. Young children who remained with their families scored ten to 20 points higher on IQ tests than children in high-quality family foster care. [ii]

Specific state options are presented for each of the following areas:

2.1 Inventory of services and resources to keep families together

2.2 Intensive family preservation and reunification services

2.3 " Flex" funds to support families in crisis

2.4 Shared family care

2.5 Substance abuse treatment that allows children to stay with their parents

2.6 Home and community-based services for children and parents with mental illness

2.7 Supportive housing programs

2.8 Removal of perpetrator in cases involving domestic violence

---