Kinship care. However, the law recognises four different types of kinship care arrangements:

Similar documents
LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL PERMANENCE POLICY 2013

Understanding Permanence for Looked After Children. a review of research for the Care Inquiry. The Care Inquiry. April 2013

Changing children s lives

Adoption Rates Briefing Westminster Hall Debate

Survey Findings Report / June Kinship Carers and Employment. By Agnes Gautier and Sarah Wellard

Handout: Risk. Predisposing factors in children include: Genetic Influences

Care Planning for Permanence in Foster Care

An outline of National Standards for Out of home Care

Children Looked After Strategy

Could do better... Must do better A study of family and friends care local authority policies

CHILDREN IN NEED OF CARE

Local Authority Adoption Services. London Borough of Hillingdon Adoption Service 855 Uxbridge Road Hayes Middlesex UB4 8HZ

Moray Council. Adoption Plan

CASCADE Research Briefing

Fostering Changes: Addressing the mental health needs of fostered children in the UK

The Recruitment of Foster Carers: Key messages from the research literature

Training and Development Book and Visual Media Catalogue

London Borough of Lewisham. Children s Social Care Placements & Procurement Strategy. LAC Commissioning Plan

Response to Proposals for the. Reform of Legal Aid in England and Wales. February 2011

Looked after children with additional support needs in Scotland

Thinking about Adoption?

Waiting to be parents: adopters experiences of being recruited

Supporting children and families returning home from care. Lisa Holmes Director, Centre for Child and Family Research

Rhondda Cynon Taff Adoption Agency. Statement of Purpose

Department for Education. Consultation on the changes to the admissions framework. Response by the Children's Legal Centre

The Children Act 1989 Guidance and Regulations. Volume 2: Care Planning, Placement and Case Review

MODULE 1.3 WHAT IS MENTAL HEALTH?

ANNUAL REPORT ON ADOPTION ACTIVITY

ANALYSIS OF ADOPTION SCORECARD INFORMATION

H5PJ 04 (SCDHSC0045) Lead practice That Promotes the Safeguarding of Individuals

H5NC 04 (SCDHS0024) Support the Safeguarding of Individuals

Policy for delegating authority to foster carers. September 2013

Information for authorised carers on out-of-home-care adoption

Looking After Children framework for children and young people living in out-of-home care arrangements. A guide for disability service providers

Adoption. /adoptionandfostering

Family Placement Team:

Statement of Purpose

Change# Shared Parenting October 2008

Elderly Caregiver Support

Climate change, justice and vulnerability

Failed By The System

Fostering for Adoption BECOMING A CARER

DECD Families Adoption Review

Looked-after children and young people

Children, Families & Education Directorate. Children s Social Services in Kent

Assessments and the Care Act

Written evidence from the British Association for Adoption & Fostering

Scottish Families Affected by Alcohol and Drugs

Slough Children s Services Trust Independent Fostering Agency Statement of Purpose

Family Group Conferences in child protection

Performance Evaluation Report The City of Cardiff Council Social Services

National Resource Center for Family-Centered Practice & Permanency Planning Hunter College School of Social Work of the City University of New York

Mandatory Written Information on Adoption: Information for Parents of a Child in Out-of-Home Care

SOLIHULL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL FOSTERING SERVICES - STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Standards of proficiency. Social workers in England

ASTH416 Develop practices which promote choice, well-being and protection of all individuals

Insight 30. Safe and Secure Homes for Our Most Vulnerable Children - Analysis of the Consultation on the Adoption Bill

'Swampy Territory' The role of the palliative care social worker in safeguarding children of adults who are receiving specialist palliative care

LONDON BOROUGH OF EALING ADOPTION SERVICE STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

Change a life - Adopt. give a child a home. Adoption Information

Equality Impact Assessment Part 1: Screening

Bournemouth Borough Council Children s Social Care. Private Fostering. Statement of Purpose

Consumer needs not being met by UK grocery market A British Brands Group research publication

Treatment Foster Care Program

Statement of Purpose Version

Legal Safeguards for Children In New Mexico

Sheffield City Council Draft Commissioning Strategy for services for people with a learning disability and their families September 2014

Decisions 1. Permission to tender for a recruitment partner to supply 15 permanent social work practitioners with a contract value of 159,000.

Local Authority Adoption Services. London Borough of Merton Adoption Service Worsfold House Church Road Mitcham Surrey CR4 3FA

About Early Education

Local Authority Adoption Services

The Frank Buttle Trust & BBC Children In Need Small Grants Programme. Child Support Application Form

Scope of Social Work Practice Social Work in Child Protection

Statement of Purpose. Child Protection/Safeguarding Service

Costs and Outcomes of Non- Infant Adoptions.

2006 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF SERVICES FOR CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE EAST RIDING OF YORKSHIRE COUNCIL

HEREFORDSHIRE COUNCIL ADOPTION AGENCY. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE Dated: April 2012 URN: SC057941

Using Integrated Recruitment and Support

Age and Experience: Consultation on a Strategy for a Scotland with an Aging Population

Corporate Parenting Board 6 January 2016

FRAMEWORK FOR PRACTICE CASEWORKER COMPETENCE. in a specific environmental setting, and at a particular developmental stage. 2

CASCADE Research Briefing

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE POLICY

Education and Employment. School based education Practical skills Life- skills Self- confidence Stability Independence

Policy Perspective Treatment and Recovery for Individuals and Families Experiencing Addiction January 11, 2016

Child Safety and Foster Care in Queensland

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL S EDUCATION AND CHILDREN S SOCIAL CARE SERVICES 2005

Care Programme Approach (CPA)

Foster Care and Adoption

Adoption Service. Statement of Purpose

Working together to safeguard children. A guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children

INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SERVICES CHILD WELFARE MANUAL. Chapter 5: General Case Management Effective Date: March 1, 2007

What s Going On to safeguard children and young people from sexual exploitation? : A data monitoring Tool

WAKEFIELD COUNCIL ADOPTION AGENCY

Work with families of children placed away from home in four European countries

6. The National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, Bringing them home

STATE OF COLORADO FY BUDGET REQUEST CYCLE: DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES

CHILD PROTECTION POLICY. City of London School (CLS) City of London School for Girls (CLSG) City of London Freemen's School (CLFS)}

SCYJ response to Ministry of Justice consultation: Preserving and Enhancing the Quality of Criminal Advocacy November 2015

UNICEF Seminar, 1 April 2014 Family Group Conferencing and Kinship Professor Marie Connolly Care: Australasian perspectives School of Health Sciences

Transcription:

Kinship care Dr Julie Selwyn, September 2009 There is a long history in the UK, as in most countries, of children being cared for by relatives and other kin when their parents, for whatever reason, are unable to care for the children themselves. Most of these care-taking arrangements are made without the involvement of the child welfare system. It is not known how many kinship carers there are in England. The only numbers known with any certainty are the 12% of children being looked after by family and friends foster carers in England. This is a similar proportion to the 11% of children in care in England placed in residential care and considerably more than the 5% placed for adoption (Department for Children, Schools and Families 2008). There are also unknown numbers of children living with kin carers, who are known to social workers, but where the carers are not approved as foster carers but may be supported in other ways, such as under the children in need provisions or under residence or special guardianship orders. However, it is probable that the largest group of kin carers are not known to children s services and are those where children are there as a result of a private arrangement. In England and Wales, it has been estimated that about 200-300,000 children and young people are living in temporary or permanent family and friends arrangements (Tapsfield and Richards 2003). Simply, kinship care can be defined and described by the way the placement came about: Formal placement arranged by a child welfare agency Informal arranged within the family without involvement of a child welfare agency However, the law recognises four different types of kinship care arrangements: Fostered with a family or friend (Part III Children Act 1989 and Regulation 23 The Fostering Regulations 1991). Subject to a residence order (S.8 Children Act 1989). Subject to a special guardianship order (S.115 and Schedule 3 Adoption and Children Act 2002, introduced in December 2005). Living with family or friends and being supported as a child in need (S17 CA 1989).

The increasing use of kin foster care, which in some local authorities may represent as much as 40% or more of all foster placements, has not been matched by an increase in knowledge for practitioners and policy makers about how well these placements work, what helps them to succeed or when they should not be used. In particular, we have only limited information about children s views of kinship care and especially of informal kin care, nor do we know how children view the benefits and disadvantages of kinship care as against those of stranger foster care. Formal kinship care placements arranged by a statutory agency The increase in the use of formal kin care has been driven by many factors including: a shortage of stranger foster carers; a move away from concepts of family dsyfunction to strengths-based theories; political philosophies which seek to diminish the role of and costs to the state; and theoretical ideas that kinship care promotes birth family contact, is stable, and maintains a child s identity, family culture, ethnicity and sense of belonging (Hunt 2003). Some of these factors are better evidenced than others. Children usually (but not always) go to people they know and with whom there is a shared culture. Good management of transitions (changing home and school) is important for children but is an under-researched area. In what circumstances do kinship placements, for example, reduce the trauma of separation from birth parents and how is this experienced by children? Children placed with kin will often remain in the same neighbourhood and school. However, such continuity and proximity can have disadvantages as well as advantages. How is contact with birth parents managed, given that there is quite often conflict between parents and kin carers and (when there are contact problems) how are such difficulties offset by other positives? This is all the more important because recent legislative changes (Children and Young Persons Bill 2007)) are likely to increase the numbers of children being placed formally with kin. These changes in turn, may lead to less suitable kin placements being made (Sinclair et al 2005) as occurred during a similar policy push in the US. A greater understanding of children s experiences of the costs and outcomes of each kind of care would help to ensure that the placements that are made are in children s best interests and are not simply driven by policy imperatives or financial considerations. There is little evidence to support concern about the quality of formal kinship care provided in more than a minority of cases. However, since children can have such very adverse experiences in kinship and stranger care (e.g. Laming 2003, Farmer

and Moyers 2008) we need to know how children can be helped to signal their distress effectively in such situations. Studies comparing formal kinship care and stranger foster care There are only two UK studies (Farmer and Moyers 2008, Hunt et al. 2008) that have compared kinship and stranger foster care. They have found that while there are many benefits to kinship care, the benefits need to be considered alongside findings that most kinship carers are more disadvantaged: being poorer, older, less educated and with more health problems than stranger foster carers. Kin carers are also often under additional stress because relationships with the birth family and other relatives can be complex and stressful because of their shared past history. However, despite these difficulties kinship carers expressed greater commitment to the child. What is clear, however, is that children placed with kin carers have higher levels of difficulty than children in the general population and have similar levels of emotional and behavioural difficulty as that found in the looked after population. There is a weight of evidence that formal kin carers receive less support from Children s Services than stranger foster carers than (see eg. Farmer and Moyers 2008, Hunt et al 2008; Hunt 2003,) and children and kin carers say they value their contact with social workers and other professionals (Farmer and Moyers 2008). We do not know how far children suffer when carers who were approved foster carers take out residence or special guardianship orders. This often reduces financial and other types of support. Studies of informal kinship care in the UK There are no studies in the UK comparing formal and informal kinship arrangements. There have been very few studies (Richards 2001; Selwyn and Saunders 2006) of informal kinship care in the UK partly because of the difficulties in identifying the population. Studies indicate that these kin carers experience the same difficulties as those formally caring for a child. Children reported that they worried about what would happen to them if their grandparent died but kept these fears to themselves. Richard s (2001) study of grandparents suggests very high levels of unmet need amongst informal kin carers but we do not know exactly how far children and informal carers are successful in accessing mainstream services when needed, such as CAMHS and educational support. Moreover, these issues like others, may vary by the ethnicity, gender and class of the carers. Outcomes in Formal Kinship Care Stability of placements There have been mixed findings in relation to the relative stability of kinship care

placements in the UK in comparison with stranger foster care. Farmer and Moyers (2008) found similar disruption rates in formal kin and non-related foster care, but that kin placements lasted longer principally because of the greater number of planned moves to other placements from stranger foster care. In addition, in kinship care, significantly fewer placements disrupted when carers were highly committed to the children, but this was not true in stranger foster care. However, this also meant that in many continuing placements, kin carers were under considerable strain, as they struggled to look after children with high levels of behavioural and emotional difficulties. Hunt and colleagues (2008) too reported greater stability in kinship than long-term foster care, with the exception of children aged 5-12 at placement where there were more disruptions in kin (43%) than stranger foster care (35%). Overall studies found that children placed at older ages had placements that were more likely to disrupt if placed with kin than with stranger foster carers. Other outcomes Children with kin are generally reported to feel secure, happy and integrated into the family. (Broad et al 2001; 2006) However, there has been limited emphasis on the potential impact on children s well-being of being brought up by carers who are more likely than non-related carers to be in poor physical and psychological health. In addition, the generation gap has received little attention and the evidence (Richards 2001; Pitcher 1999) is contradictory. Since studies in the UK have consistently shown that kin carers often suffer economic hardship, an unanswered question is whether the risks to children s development of living in poverty are moderated by the benefits of living with a relative. Recent research in England (Farmer and Moyers 2008, Hunt et al 2008) suggests that on a range of dimensions related to children s well-being, such as health, school attendance and improvements in behavioural and emotional difficulties children do as well in kin as in stranger foster care. Children s views There is a paucity of literature examining children s views of being cared for away from home. Most studies are retrospective and reliant on adults memories (e.g, Triseliotis 1984) with other information coming from studies that had sampled more broadly (Buchanan 2008). Some studies have interviewed children while in care (Sinclair 2007) but only a handful have examined children s views of kinship care (Farmer and Moyers 2008, Broad et al 2001). Children reported that they felt safe in their placements and thought their care had improved since leaving their birth parents. Friendships, school

and consultation about contact plans with their birth parents were all issues that concerned the children and young people. Children cited advantages of being in kinship care such as avoiding local authority care, maintaining links with family, siblings, and friends; sustaining racial and cultural heritage and getting support with their education. However, there were also disadvantages such as limitations to freedom, financial hardship and inability to access care leavers services. Messing (2006), in the US, reported similar findings but also found that children living with kin reported less stigma and trauma. Although other research has found that kinship carers are reluctant to take legal orders (Farmer and Moyers 2008), for the children in Messing s study, legal ties were viewed as a source of comfort and belonging over and above those of the blood tie. These findings raise interesting questions about the symbolic significance for children of legal orders. In spite of the large numbers of children living with relatives and in foster care the voices of these children and young people are under-represented in the literature. Least is known about the largest numerical group of children living with informal kin carers Assumptions are often made about kinship care, frequently based on beliefs about the role and importance of the extended family. Yet many of these are untested, and we do not know enough about children s own experiences of the different kinds of care, how they perceive their benefits, react to their limitations and what helps or could help them to make the best of their placements.

References Broad B, Hayes R and Rushworth (2001) Kith and Kin - Kinship care for vulnerable young people National Children s Bureau and Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Broad B (2006) Some advantages and disadvantages of kinship care: a view from research In Talbot C and Calder M (eds) Assessment in kinship care, Lyme Regis, Russell House Publishing, Buchanan, A., Flouri, E., Tan J-P., Griggs, J. and Attar-Achwartz, S. (2008) Grandparenting: the growing influence of grandparents. ChildRIGHT Vol 248, pp 14-18. Department for Children, Schools and Families (2008) Statistics for Education: First Release, Children looked after by Local Authorities in England, Year Ending 31 March 2008, London, Department for Children, Schools and Families. Farmer, E. and Moyers, S. (2008) Kinship care: Fostering Effective Family and Friends Care, London, Jessica Kingsley. Hunt, J. (2003) Family and Friends Carers: Scoping paper prepared for the Department of Health. London: Department of Health. Hunt J., Waterhouse S. and Lutman E. (2008), Keeping Them In The Family: Outcomes For Abused And Neglected Children Placed With. Family Or Friends Carers Through Care Proceedings, London, BAAF. Laming Report (2003) The Victoria Climbie Inquiry: Report of an Inquiry by Lord Laming, Cm 5730, London, Stationery Office. Messing, J. (2006) From the child s perspective: A qualitative analysis of kinship care placements, Children and Youth Services Review 28 pp1415-1434 Pitcher D (1999a): When Grandparents Care. Plymouth City Council Social Services Department. Richards, A. (2001) Second Time Around A survey of Grandparents raising their Grandchildren. London: Family Rights Group. Selwyn, J. and Saunders, H. (2006) Greenwich Kinship Care Team: An evaluation of the team s work. Report to Greenwich Council, The Hadley Centre, School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol. Sinclair I., Baker C., Wilson K. and Gibbs I. (2005) Foster Children: Where They Go and How They Get On, London, Jessica Kingsley. Tapsfield, R. and Richards, A., Family and friends care: the way forward, Family Rights Group, 2003 Triseliotis J (1984) Identity and security in adoption and long term fostering Early Child Development and Care, Vol 15 No 2-3 pp149-70