GROWING UP IN FOSTER CARE
PERCEPTIONS OF CHILDREN’S WELLBEING
Associate Professor Elizabeth Fernandez
Social Work
School of Social Sciences and International Studies
University of New South Wales
26th – 29th July 2011
University of York
3rd Conference of the International Society for Child Indicators
e.fernandez@unsw.edu.au
The impact of the care experience on children’s
wellbeing
• Children come to the foster family setting as an already at risk
group in relation to children's wellbeing in care research has
identified a range of concerns including
• Instability in care placements (Barber & Delfabbro, 2003;
Fernandez, 1999; Pecora, Williams, Kesler & Herings, 2003; Ryan
and Testa, 2004)
• Inability of care systems to ensure optimal educational outcomes
(Jackson, 2000; Dobel-Ober, Lawrence, Berridge & Sinclair, 2003;
Rosenfeld & Richman, 2003; Zetlin, Weinberg & Kimm, 2003)
• Children’s vulnerability to physical and emotional difficulties while
in care ( Flynn, Ghazal, Legault, Vandermeulen & Petrick, 2004;
James, Landsverk, Slymen & Leslie, 2004
• Risk of losing attachments to their biological families (Cleaver,
2000; Kufeldt et al, 2003)
2
The impact of the care experience on children’s
wellbeing
• Current research points to limitations of cross
sectional studies in capturing developmental
sequences
• Limited research that views outcome from different
participants in the foster care process (Courtney, 2000;
Kelly & Gilligan, 2002)
• Increasing recognition of the need to give a central
place to the voices of children in research and practice
(Gilligan, 2002; Newman, 2003)
3
The Research Aims
• To document the needs and experiences of children in
care from the perspective of their carers, case
workers, birth parents and children themselves
• To explore children’s perceptions of their developing
relationships with foster families, and their established
relationships with their birth family and significant
others
• To analyse the perceived adjustment and psychosocial
functioning of children over the study period and
document placement and developmental outcomes
4
Data Collection
• Interviews were carried out at 4 months after
entry to care and 18-24 month intervals thereafter
• Child interviews (8 – 18 yrs)
• Caseworkers (of children of all ages)
• Foster/adoptive carers (of children of all ages)
• Birth parents (of children of all ages)
5
Data Collection (cont’d)
Measures used in the study
• Achenbach CBCL (completed by carers)
• Achenbach TRF (completed by teachers)
• Hare self esteem scale (completed by children)
• Interpersonal parent and peer attachment scale
(completed by children)
• Attachment styles questionnaire (completed by
carers)
• Foster care alliance scale (completed by children
and carers)
6
About the Children
• 59 children participated in the study
• Boys 52%
• Girls 48%
• Ages ranged from 3 to 15
• Children are from Barnardos Find-a-Family Program,
an integrated service of permanent family care and
adoption for “hard to place” children requiring longterm placement. Many have multiple failed
placements prior to their Find-a-Family placement
7
Care History
• Total placements
– A third of the children had more than 5 placements
in total including pre Barnardos care history
– The median number of placements was 4
placements and the average was 4.3 placements
– The majority (71%) of respondents are in non
relative foster families and a further 19% are
adopted
– Half the children have been in their current
placement for four years or more
8
Children’s Conceptions of Fostering
• What is a foster home?: "Places of refuge where people can stay,
where you get looked after.” Would you call this home a foster
home?: "No, this is my house.” (male, 11 years)
• “A person who acts like your mum and dad, I haven’t got my mum
and dad or my brother or the pets that I had before. That’s why it’s
not the same. You’re in somebody else’s house and it’s not your
real mum and dad but it’s the person that’s looking after you for the
moment.” (female, 8 years)
• “Um, I think it is alright. It is not that much different than living with
a real parent. You still have your real parents but you have another
family that supports you. That help you, they do what your real
parents do, because they cant for whatever reason” (female, 13
years)
• “No a normal kid like everyone else. Because here it is like a real
family. Some parents don’t care about children, that’s why I came
into foster care.” (male, 12 years)
9
Children’s Conceptions of Fostering (cont’d)
• “The good things umm. I guess the good thing is like feeling you
are part of the family but the bad thing is knowing that they are not
you family, you know” (female 15 years)
• “For me it’s good, for me I like it cause I’ve got good parents and
good friends and I’m just lucky” (female,14 years
• “Sort of because they miss their mum and they really want to go
back to her, and they won’t be able to see her for a long, long time,
so they act differently because of this. But once they settle in they
get fine, and then um they just forget about it and start moving on.”
(male, 9 years)
• “I don’t know. I don’t really know what its like to be a foster adult. I
don’t really know what its like to be a normal child” (male, 17 years)
10
Change of Placement and Children’s Responses
Many of the children interviewed had multiple carers over time.
Children’s placements ranged from 2 to 7 foster homes. Many
children were aware that they would eventually find a
permanent foster placement, even though they were not sure
how long their present placement would last
• “(SIGH) well if I am very very, extremely good I might stay here
and this might be my forever family but if um, if this isn’t a
good place I will have to move, which I don’t want to” (female,
8 years)
• “(Until) I'm old enough to move out into a flat” (female,
11years)
• “Hard to make friends, and hard to keep contact with my old
friends” (female, 14 years)
• “I feel sad at times, leaving my friends behind and moving to
different schools, trying to make new friends” (male, 16 years)
11
Foster Parent Cohesion
• Forty-eight per cent of respondents indicated they got on 'very well'
both with their foster mother and their foster father.
• All but one respondent indicated that they got on with their foster
mother ‘very well’ or ‘quite well’
• Almost 9 out of 10 respondents were positive about their
relationship with their foster father, rating 'very well' or 'quite well‘
• Eighty-six per cent of respondents were positive about their
relationship with their foster sibling
• The relationships with the foster mothers remained very positive,
especially amongst boys and younger children
• Children who had a stronger level of maternal attachment were more
likely to sustain highly cohesive relationships within the foster
families
12
Children’s perceptions of cohesion
• The higher the cohesion with the foster mother the higher the
cohesion with the foster father (r=0.37, n=40, p=0.021)
• Age was significantly related to cohesion with the foster father
(r=0.5, p=0.01) such that older children were less likely to report
getting on “very well” with the foster father
• The child’s cohesion with other children from the foster family, was
significantly related to the child’s number of placements
• Children who got on very well with the children of the foster family
had significantly fewer placements than children who did not get on
very well (p= 0.018)
13
Cohesion with Foster Mother – Foster Father
In general the children manage to have good relationships with
their carers.
Q. “What is it like living here, with (Carer)”
• “She is the best mum, and she looks after me and she takes me
to school. He is the best dad and he works for my family to get
money, so does mum and they make us live more” (male, 11
years)
• “They cuddle me and they say that they love me, they take care
of me all the time. They take me to the doctors if I look sick. They
give me food on a plate. They give me my room, my own room.
They take me to friend’s houses and drop me off at school and
pick me up and they say that they love me” (male, 11 years)
• “Good, everything is good. I want to stay here until I have money
to buy a house.” (male, 10 years)
14
The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA)
• The IPPA, was administered at Interviews 2 and 3 to assess each
child’s level of attachment to his or her current foster mother,
foster father and friends or peers.
• There are three subscales – trust, communication and alienation
and a total attachment score
• A higher score indicates greater attachment
• T-tests were used to compare the each child’s scores at these two
interviews on the IPPA three subscales – trust, communication
and alienation and a total attachment score.
• The analyses indicated statistically significant changes in the
children’s ratings for maternal and peer attachment but not for
paternal attachment
15
Changes in IPPA scores from Interview 2 to Interview
3 for all children
Interview 2
Interview 3
Mean
Std Dev
Mean
Std Dev
sig
Alienation
22.5
3.4
25.8
3.4
p=0.001
Communication
23.1
3.5
23.9
4.3
ns
Trust
28.2
4.0
33.2
5.0
p=0.000
Total
91.2
12.6
102.7
15.8
p=0.008
Alienation
23.0
3.6
23.66
5.4
ns
Communication
23.3
3.0
22.7
5.9
ns
Trust
28.5
4.3
31.0
6.9
ns
Total
91.3
12.4
95.3
22.4
ns
Alienation
22.1
4.7
24.0
5.2
ns
Trust
33.5
6.1
37.6
6.1
p=0.023
Communication
27.0
5.0
31.3
5.8
p=0.002
Total
85.7
15.7
96.7
15.4
Maternal Attachment
Paternal Attachment
Peer Attachment
p=0.013 16
The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA)
(cont)
• Children reported better maternal attachment trust and
communication, and overall peer attachment
• Indicates that the children are feeling more settled in their
relationships with their foster mother and the same aged
children
• No progression or deterioration in the children’s feelings of
attachment toward their foster father
• Boys reported improved scores on three maternal attachment
scores, including alienation, trust and the total score. They also
showed and significantly improved scores on all the peer
attachment scores
• Younger children had stronger maternal trust and better peer
communication at Interview 3
17
The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA)
(cont)
• The teenage children had improved maternal alienation scores,
better maternal trust and improved total maternal attachment
scores. Additionally older children had significantly better peer
communication scores. There were no changes in paternal
attachment scores
• The changes were in a positive direction and not signalling
deterioration and lend some support to the benefits of the
children’s time in care
• Most encouragingly the strongest changes were observed for
boys and for older children
• Older children and boys were “catching up” to the girls and
younger children on some of these variables
18
Relationships between IPPA subscales
• Children’s responses to the maternal and peer
subscales are closely inter-related
• Responses to the Paternal Attachment questions,
however were only related to each other and not to the
other two sets of subscales
• Children’s attachment to their peers and foster mothers
were based on similar judgements but children thought
in a different way when considering their attachment to
their foster fathers
19
Frequency of Contact
• Birth Mothers and siblings were the most frequently
contacted family members
• One child in 5 had contact with his or her birth mother at
least monthly
• Nearly three-quarters of children (72%) saw their birth
mother at least once every 3 months
• A quarter had no contact at all
• Just over half (56%) of the children had no contact at all
with their birth father
• 28% saw their father between once a month and every
few months or holidays
20
Frequency of Contact (cont)
• Grandparents were an occasional point of contact
• 26% of children confirmed contact with their maternal
aunt
• 4 children in 10 had ongoing contact with their previous
carers
• Nine in ten (90%) respondents report that since the last
interview they have had some contact with their
siblings who are not living with them. One in four had
contact either monthly or fortnightly with them
21
Children’s Connection with their Birth Parents
‘…they say that she's not a proper Mum’. (male, 11yrs)
Children throughout the interviews seem very connected to their birth
mother. The children in the main have a desire to live with their mothers or
would choose to confide in their birth mother if they were having any
difficulties, although the foster mothers were also noted as a confidante.
•
“That she is still alive and I can talk to her. I have questions that want
answers and sometimes we argue. It’s all over again, feel sad for my mum,
and when its time to depart. I re-live past a little” (female, 18 year)
•
“Sometimes but most of the time not really.. It’s hard that you have two
families and you only get to see each family some of the time. And you don’t
know which to call mum, and they don’t know which mum you are talking
about and it’s hard” (female, 12 years)
Some children expressed clear and positive connections with their birth
parents while also evaluating the positive aspects of the new home.
•
“I want to live with my mum but I like the school and that ...And mum
couldn't pay for the school, so I'll live here, but I probably want to live with
my mum” (male, 12 years)
22
Current Contact with Family of Origin (cont)
• Compared to Interview 1, the significant change was an increase in
children’s desire to see their fathers
• Many of the children expressed that they never see their birth
fathers, they did however appear to be interested in seeing them
and establishing a connection
• ‘…I'd like to see him (father) a lot more, heaps and heaps and
heaps more times, it makes me feel happy’ (female, 8years)
• ‘I don’t have a real dad, I never did. I only have false dads’ (female,
8 years)
• ‘I’ve never had a first dad’ (male, 11years)
• “Sometimes I do, I want to know about my dad because I don’t
know where he is from. People ask me where he is from and I just
have to say I don’t know. They say what do you mean you don’t
know? And imp like ‘I don’t know’” (female, 16 years)
23
Children’s Interviews
• Children’s self esteem was assessed using the hare self
esteem scale. Includes peer self-esteem, home self
esteem and school self-esteem and a total score
• Girls and boys both had an average of 82
• Peer self esteem was negatively correlated with total
number of placements, (r= -0.42, p=0.05) so that the
more placements children had the lower their peer self
esteem
• Age at entry to care was also found to be related to
“global self esteem” (r=0.37, p=0.05). That is, children
who went into care at an older age had higher self
esteem at interview 2
24
Hare Self Esteem Scores, including gender
breakdown
• Girls were found to have remained stable from
Interview 2 to Interview 3 on all the subscales and the
total self esteem score
• Boys however had significantly higher home self
esteem scores and total self esteem scores at
Interview 3 compared to interview 2
• This finding is encouraging given the small sample
sizes and indicates that boys responded positively to
the foster home environment
25
Self esteem and Children’s care history
From the children’s interviews it was apparent that
being in care affected their self esteem. However, the
children did also compare themselves to their peers for
some reassurance
• “It’s like we're second hand kids; unless that's how all
kids feel who are my age…” (female, 12 years)
• “When I see my friends with their parents I see nothing
different...it just seems the same, like I’ve got play
stations and Nintendo’s, and being allowed to play and
going to friends houses as well” (male, 13years)
• “Some people in my class don't even have a dad. And I
get lots of stuff”(female, 10years)
26
Child Behaviour Checklist
• In the present study the CBCL 4-18 was used
• This is an observational measure for children aged 4
to 18 (Achenbach 1991) which assesses 113 problem
behaviours to provide information on 3 overall
problem scores
• Internalising Problems: inhibited or over-controlled
behaviour (I, II and III)
• Externalising Problems: antisocial or undercontrolled behaviour e.g., delinquency or aggression
(IV and V)
• Total Problems Scale: all mental health problems
reported by parents or adolescents
• 8 further subscales
27
Children aged 4-17 years in “clinical range” of problems on
CBCL, compared to the Mental Health of Young People in
Australia (MHYPA) Survey (n=3870)
2nd
Initial
Interview Interview
Summary scales
MYPHA
%
%
%
Total problems
38.2
43.4
14.1
Internalising problems
21.8
35.8
12.8
Externalising problems
37.3
34.0
12.9
Comparisons are made with the findings of the
Australian government’s mental health of young people
in Australia (2000), based on a national representative
sample
28
Carer Ratings on the Achenbach Child
Behaviour Checklist interview 1
• 43.4% of the children were in the clinical range for
number of total problems
• 35.8% for internalising problems
• 34.0% for externalising problems
• Clinical rate for “Total Problems” is three times the
Australian community sample
• Internalising and externalising problems exceeded
the MHYPA community norms
29
Carer Ratings on the Achenbach Child Behaviour
Checklist interview 2
• Between 7.5 and 28% demonstrated clinically
significant problems on the subscales
• Attention problems, social problems, delinquent
behaviour, anxiety and depression rated in the clinical
range
• 38% of children were in the clinical range of “total
problems”
• 22% for internalising problems
• 37% for externalising problems
30
Comparison data of scores from
Interviews 1 to 2
• Significant decreases detected between carer ratings
at Interview 1 and 2 on the internalising scores (t=2.07,
df 50, p<0.05) and the anxiety and depression subscale
(t=2.01, df 50, p< 0.05)
• Fewer children fell into the clinical range of “total
problems” at the second interview
• Ratings remained above the Australian normative data
on all subscales total problems and externalising
problems
• Internalising problems had dropped.
31
CBCL Teacher Report Form (TRF)
• Teachers of children in care were asked to
complete the Achenbach teachers check-list, a
companion to the child behaviour checklist
• The instrument is norm referenced and assesses
key problem sub-scales and overall problem
scores
• The TRF also includes an Adaptive Functioning
Scale which include 5 ratings over two subscales
on the child’s positive attributes as displayed at
School
32
TRF (cont’d)
• Academic Performance
– teacher’s ratings of the child’s performance in academic
subjects
• Adaptive Functioning
• Four adaptive characteristics and the sum of the four
characteristics
– How hard the child is working
– How appropriately he/she is behaving
– How much he/she is learning
– How happy he/she is
• The TRF was completed for children aged between 5 and
17, with an average age of 11.1 years (sd 3.1 years)
• Additionally each child’s main teacher completed a
checklist for another child in the class, matched for age and
sex but who resides in a birth family
33
Table: T-scores for TRF Problems at Assessment 1
for Care and Control Groups
Care Group
mean
Control Group
sd
max
mean
sd
max
internalising
problems
53.35 8.67
80.00
56.37
8.48 68.00
externalising
problems
56.72 9.19
84.00
52.14
7.51 66.00
total problems
56.40 8.95
80.00
55.09
7.34 68.00
34
Table: (cont’d)
Care Group
Control Group
Subscales
mean
sd
max
mean
sd
max
aggressive
behaviour
58.21 8.22
91.00
54.28
4.77 66.00
anxiety/depression
56.81 6.24
77.00
59.09
7.23 71.00
attention problems
57.47 5.91
73.00
56.33
5.12 68.00
delinquent
behaviour
56.35 6.98
78.00
54.16
4.94 69.00
social problems
58.63 7.49
81.00
56.53
6.02 70.00
somatic
complaints
52.56 5.79
77.00
51.21
2.99 64.00
thought problems
54.63 6.98
78.00
52.42
6.88 83.00
withdrawn
53.91 4.87
67.00
55.95
5.48 70.00
35
Children in care
• The problem subscale scores have a minimum of 50,
and a clinical cut off of 64
• The maximum scores for the children varied from 67
(withdrawn) to 91 (for aggressive behaviour)
• The average scores ranged from 52.6 (somatic
complaints) to 58.63 (social problems)
• the highest average scores for girls was social
problems (mean 59.65) and for boys, aggression
(mean 58.48)
• There were 14% children in the clinical range for the
summary scores for internalising problems, (greater
than 63 on the teacher ratings), 21% with
externalising problems and 17%7 over threshold on
“total problems”
36
Control Group Children
• Compared to the children in care only two
significant differences were detected
• Firstly the children in care had higher t-scores on
aggressive behaviour (means = 58.2 for care and
54.3 control; P=0.013)
• The care group had higher t-scores for externalising
problems (means =56.7 for care, 52.1 for control,
p=0.019)
• The control group had high level of children in the
clinical range of scores for internalising problems
• 25%of the children in the control group had scores
which fell in the clinical range for internalising
problems
37
Table: T-scores for adaptive functioning scales for
children in care and control group
Care Children
Control Children
mean
sd
max
mean
sd
max
Academic
Performance
43.60
6.22
60.0
45.69
6.47 65.00
Working Hard
45.63
5.98
59.0
46.36
6.09 65.00
Behaving
Appropriately
42.86
5.93
57.0
45.64
5.59 60.00
Learning
43.49
6.63
65.0
44.07
6.72 65.00
Happy
45.30
5.40
59.0
45.62
4.99 58.00
Sum working
hard to happy
43.16
6.02
59.0
44.36
6.29 64.00
A high score is indicative of more adaptive functioning
38
Adaptive Functioning Scales (TRF)
• Children in care
– children in care had the highest average score for
“happiness” and the lowest for behaving
appropriately
– By gender, girls had their highest average ratings
for working hard (mean = 44.85)
– and the boys, being happy (46.35) or working hard
(46.5)
– The highest percentiles in the scales for this group
ranged from 73rd percentile (behaving appropriately)
to the 93rd percentile (learning)
• Control group
– The control group children’s percentile means
varied from a low of 30.31 for learning, to a high of
37.40 for working hard
39
Comparisons between the groups at
assessment 2
• Both groups demonstrated significant changes in
their TRF problem scores from the first assessments
• With regard to the summary scales, both groups
showed significant reductions in the ratings
• In the subscales, the care group changed in six
areas, as opposed to 4 areas in the control group
• The strongest changes for the control group
surrounded the internalising cluster
• The care children showed most change in the
externalising clusters
40
Summary
• Both the children in care and control group had a range
of problems detected
• Evidence of a greater prevalence of problems in the
care group
• The high prevalence of internalising problems amongst
the control group
• At the second assessment there were no differences
between the two groups on the problem subscales,
which, in a restorative program is a positive finding
41
Summary (cont’d)
• On the adaptive functioning scales, children in
care showed significant improvements across all
subscales
• Children in care were functioning near to the 50th
percentile, based on the normal population
• Control group showed some significant gains but
without the same breadth or magnitude
• Some of this change may be attributed to the
effects of restorative care and the Barnardos
intervention
42
Caseworker Assessments Of Child’s
Adjustment (cont)
• Caseworkers were asked to rate the child’s adjustment
on a 4-point scale where 1= ‘poor’ and 4= ‘excellent’
•
Caseworkers rated 84% of children’s adjustment as
‘excellent’ (40%) or ‘adequate’ (44%)
• ‘mixed’ (10%) or ‘poor’ (6%) adjustment
• Younger children were rated as having better
adjustment than older children [t(34)=3.3, p=0.002]
43
Adjustment to placement over time
• The proportion of children in placement with excellent
adjustment grows with time
• 17.5% to 58.5% in year 3
• 54.5% in year 4
• Mixed or poor adjustment decreases from 42.5% in year
1 to 16% in year 6
44
Caseworkers ratings of child’s academic progress
• Caseworkers were asked to rate the child’s academic
progress over the last 2 years. Three-quarters (75%)
were rated as progressing very well (19%) or
moderately well (55%). Approximately a quarter (26%)
of children were rated as progressing ‘not very well’.
There were no age or sex differences
• Those children who have been with their carers for at
least 3 years have, on average, better academic
adjustment and better overall adjustment [t(45)=-3.56,
p=0.001]
• And better health [t(44)=1.98, p=0.054]
45
Change of Schools
Three quarters of the children had experienced at least one
change in schooling since their separation from their birth family
More than half of the children had had three or more changes
•
“Heaps, probably about 5 or 6 times. I think I get stupider every time I
have to move” (female,14 yrs)
•
“I’ve been to thousands of schools...about, 5 or 6. I don't know” (male,
11years)
When asked to evaluate how they were doing at school, most children
attempted to assess their own abilities.
•
“…can't hardly read…and plus I'm year 5 going in year 6…can't even
hardly read or do neat writing…’ (female, 10 years)
•
“Um, playing and English. I'm not so good at my maths” (female, 11years)
•
“Hand writing everything. Not everything in the world though…I'm good
at mostly everything” (female, 8yrs)
•
“Um I was going really well in school and the whole time I was in the top
of classes. I enjoyed it and wish I had finished” (female, 19 years) 46
Positive life events
Per cent
‘Yes’
Per cent
‘Yes’
Achievements
Educational achievements
Sports or athletic achievements
Other recreational activities (eg
music/ art)
Trips, vacations
Having a pet
Attachment
Bond with birth parent
52
48
44
76
48
32
Bond with previous caregiver
8
Bond with present caregiver
72
Significant Other attachment
Visiting siblings, birth parents,
extended family
Friendships
30
50
62
Stable foster
placement
Stable foster placement
78
Job/ Culture
14
Job/ employment
Other
Developmental
achievements
Participation in
significant family events
Move to emotionally
healthier environment
Better health
Healing (emotional,
psychological)
52
65
33
18
29
47
Positive life events
• 94% of children had at least one of the five listed
‘achievement’ life events
• 48% had had two or three such events
• 92% of children had at least one of the six listed
‘attachment’ life events
• 52% had had two or three such events
• Caseworkers rated 90% of children as being in
‘excellent’ (41%) or ‘very good’ (49%) health
48
Positive Achievements and Critical Events
• Most frequently reported was having a stable foster
placement (78%)
• Three quarters of the children (76%) were able to go on
a trip or vacation
• Development of relationships with carers, new friends
or birth family was also common, experienced by two
thirds
• Many children experienced some level of educational
achievement (52%) or sporting achievement (42%)
• The most frequently reported critical or crisis events
reported included the experiences of bullying,
emotional abuse and violence or physical abuse
49
Positive life events
• The greater the total number of positive life events the
better the academic adjustment (r=0.42, p=0.003), health
(r=0.38, p=0.007), and the better the caseworker’s overall
adjustment assessment for the child (r=0.34, p=0.016)
• The greater the positive achievement life events the
greater the academic adjustment (r=0.58, p<0.001), health
(r=0.43, p=0.002) and overall adjustment ratings (r=0.38,
p=0.008)
• The greater the number of positive attachment life events
the greater the health assessment (r=0.38, p=0.008)
• Having a stable foster placement is related to higher
academic adjustment t(44)=-3.50, p=0.001), higher
satisfaction with the placement t(48)=-3.20, p=0.002),
health; t(47)=-4.94, p<0.001), and higher adjustment
scores
50
Parenting Variables
• Caseworkers were asked to rate carers on a number of
variables relating to parenting styles and skills
• ‘the ability in relation to managing the child’ and
disciplinary style were the more problematic areas
noted
• Those with a younger child were more likely to be
rated as never having a problem with disciplinary style
or level of aggression in parenting (81%) than were
those with an older child (38%)
51
Caseworkers’ Assessments of Parenting Styles
Responsiveness
Rating
Ability to
Ability to
Ability in
Disciplinary
express
respond
relation to
style/ level of
warmth
sensitively
managing
aggression
child
Never a problem
%
%
%
%
%
66
77
80
47
59
34
23
20
53
42
100
100
100
100
100
Problem
developed or
resolved
Total
52
Parenting Variables
Responsiveness
• Problems with the carer’s responsiveness was negatively related to the
child’s academic adjustment (=-0.49, p=0.001)
• The caseworker’s overall satisfaction with the placement (=-0.47,
p=0.001)
• The child’s overall adjustment (=-0.65, p<0.001)
• And health (=-0.48, p=0.001)
Warmth
• Problems with the carer’s ability to express warmth towards the child was
negatively related to the caseworker’s overall satisfaction with the
placement (=-0.50, p<0.001)
• the child’s overall adjustment (=-0.55, p<0.001)
• And health (=-0.40, p=0.005). There was no association with the child’s
ease of making friends or academic progress
Sensitivity
• Problems with the carer’s ability to respond sensitively was negatively
related to the child’s academic adjustment (=-0.33, p=0.023)
• The caseworker’s overall satisfaction with the placement (=-0.59,
p<0.001), the overall adjustment (=-0.64, p<0.001)
53
• The child’s health (=-0.44, p=0.002)
Parenting Variables (cont)
Ability to manage child
• The carer’s ability in relation to managing the child was negatively related
to the caseworker’s overall satisfaction with the placement (=-0.30,
p=032)
• The child’s overall adjustment (=-0.39, p=0.006)
• And health (=-0.35, p=0.014)
Disciplinary Style / Level of Aggression
• The carer’s disciplinary style or level of aggression in parenting was
negatively related to the child’s academic adjustment (=-0.35, p=0.015)
• The caseworker’s overall satisfaction with the placement (=-0.45,
p=0.001)
• Overall adjustment (=-0.62, p<0.001)
• And health (=-0.59, p<0.001)
Stressors on Carers
• Rating of the child’s overall adjustment is higher on average in the
absence of a stressor on carers that is related to the care of the child
(t(47)=-2.26, p=0.029)
54
Summary and Implications
• Children had high levels of psychological need
• Children’s scores on the CBCL were higher than published
normative data reaffirming their level of psychological need
findings from this and previous research.
• Problems with attention, social interactions, anxiety, aggression
approximate estimates from other studies
• Findings underline the importance of recognising emotional and
behavioural difficulties experienced by children in care early and
identifying their impact on carers.
• A comprehensive plan of placement support for carers including
specialist assessments and access to treatment services and stress
management is indicated and lower case loads.
• Monitor children at increased risk of instability in care
• Support children at risk of psychological difficulties with
therapeutic services
• Support carers in enhancing their relationship with troubled
children
• Skill foster parents in approaches needed for the sensitive
management of children’s emotional and behavioural problems
55
Summary and Implications cont’d
• Children reported good levels of cohesion with foster carers at 3
interviews. Significant relationships emerged regarding the
children’s judgment of their interpersonal skills and attachment
with their foster parents
• Resources and training to enable carers and care systems to
build on these strengths is stressed
• The nature of the relationship with the foster fathers appear to
have had an important developmental influence on the children.
Developing approaches to promote fuller involvement of fathers
in fostering relationships are important to outcomes for children
• While acknowledging strong attachments with their foster parents
children desired more contact with their family of origin.
• Contact remains a challenging and contentious issue (Cleaver,
2000) and carers must be supported in their dual task of building
strong attachments with their foster children while responding to
the children’s need for continuing connection with birth families
56
Summary and Implications cont’d
• Children’s sense of happiness improved overtime is a
positive finding implying placement in care provided a
route to rehabilitative intervention for children with
maltreating histories
• Permanent care afforded a context to develop a more
secure base
• Being in care offered a pathway into restorative services
• School environment and the educational process can
potentially offer structure, boundaries and security to the
children in care systems
• Develop co-ordinated multidisciplinary response to
address overlapping domains of need, such as education
and mental health
57
Methodological and Ethical Considerations
• Justification of children’s involvement and value in
being ‘heard’
• Negotiation of informed consent- who gives consent
and how
• Role of gatekeepers in enabling/disabling
consent/participation
• Ensuring processes for disengaging and debriefing
from interviews
• Availability of care professionals for referral to deal
with the emotional impact of interviews
• Providing a safe and confidential environment to
express their views
• Confidentiality and limits arising from child protection
legislation
58
Publication related to the study
•
Fernandez, E. (2010), Wellbeing in Foster care: An Australian Longitudinal
Study of Outcomes in Fernandez, E., Barth, R. (Eds), ‘How Does Foster
Care Work? International Evidence on Outcomes, London, Jessica
Kingsley Publishers
•
Fernandez, E. (2009), Children’s wellbeing in care: Evidence from a
longitudinal study of outcomes, Children and Youth Services Review, vol.
31
•
Fernandez, E. (2008), Unravelling Emotional, Behavioural and Educational
Outcomes in a Longitudinal Study of Children in Foster Care, British
Journal of Social Work, vol. 38, iss. 7, pp1283-1301
•
Fernandez, E. (2007), How Children Experience Fostering Outcomes:
Participatory Research with Children, Child and Family Social Work, vol.
12, iss. 4 , pp349-359
•
Fernandez, E. (2006), Growing up in care: Resilience and care outcomes.
Promoting resilience in child welfare. (Eds Flynn, R.J., Dudding, P.M, and
Barber, J.G.) University of Ottawa Press. Ch. 8. (pp 131-156)
59