ACWA 10

1. Family Reunification or Restoration in Australian Out-of-Home Care: Conceptual and Methodological Issues ACWA 10 Building a Child Friendly Australia: Responding to Vulnerable Families. Association of Children's Welfare Agencies Conference 2-4 August 2010 Sydney Convention and Exhibition Centre A/Prof Paul Delfabbro University of Adelaide A/Prof Elizabeth Fernandez The University of New South Wales

2. Family reunification – Introduction Reunification is Defined as: • The return of children in foster care placements to the home of their birth family • A process aimed at helping children in out of home care attain the optimum level of reconnection with their birth family. This optimal level of reconnection may fall somewhere on a continuum from physical return through to lesser forms of contact or visitation (Maluccio et al., 1996) • Reunification is a primary goal of foster care systems, the most common permanency planning decision

3. Family Reunification • Fewer programs aim at reunifying families than programs aimed at preserving intact families • Reunification decision-making and the process of reintegrating children into birth families after care remain under-researched • Few controlled studies: available evidence is mixed and based largely on non-experimental designs or non-equivalent comparison groups

4. Reunification Previous Research • Two main kinds of studies • Studies that primarily outline timing and patterns of reunification and measure predictors • Studies that primarily outline timing and patterns of reentry to out of home care following reunification, and measure predictors of reentry • Few studies feature more extensive outcome measures other than basic reunification or reentry patterns. (Bullock et al., 1998; Cordero, 2004; 1995; Wulczyn, 2004) • Limited Australian studies of family reunification

5. Reunification: Major Patterns and Predictors • Predictor variables most commonly included were age of the child, gender, ethnicity, reasons for placement and placement type Some studies explore: • Child characteristics such as behavioural and emotional problems prior to and during placement • Parental or family characteristics such as substance abuse and compliance with case plans

6. Timing of Reunification • Evidence suggests that most children placed in out of home care eventually return to their families (Ainsworth, 2001; Maluccio et al., 2000) Reunification is: • More likely to take place earlier in a placement • The first year a child is in foster care the probability of reunification is 28%. This probability drops to 16% over the following year (Wulczyn 2004) • Probability of reunification decreases the longer the spell in care (Goerge,1990; Fernandez, 1999; Fanshel & Shinn, 1978, Delfabbro et al., 2003)

7. Child Characteristics Children’s age at admission • Very young children were seen to be the least likely to return home and adolescents more likely to experience rapid return • Children in middle childhood (5-12 years) were also more likely to return than under 5 year olds (Courtney & Wong, 1996; Fraser et al, 1996; Fanshel & Shinn, 1978; Kortenkamp et al, 2004)

8. Parent Characteristics • Parental profiles associated with reduced probability of reunion include mental illness, emotional problems and substance abuse (Jones, 1998) • Completion of a drug rehabilitation program is associated with reunification. Caseworkers, and judges respond to program completion as a salient indicator of parental commitment and intent (Smith, 2003)

9. Family Characteristics • Family disadvantage (Financial, housing problems, single parenthood) was found to be a robust predictor of reentry (Courtney 1995; Frame et al. 2000; Jones 1998) • Number and severity of caregiver problems at reunification (e.g.. substance use, problematic parenting skills, non compliance with service plans) (Festinger, 1996) • Low rating of caregiver parenting skills by social workers and low levels of formal and informal family support are associated with reduced probability of reunification (Festinger, 1996) and isolation of caregivers (Terling, 1999)

10. Conceptual and Methodological Challenges • Definition of reunification: what does this mean when kin are involved, physical return homes vs. closure of cases? • Active vs. Passive reunification (as an outcome of practice vs. expected event) • Issues of causality: clustering of predictors (e.g., age, family functioning, behavioural problems) in predicting outcomes, role of family contact • Post-reunification outcomes

11. Previous NSW Reunification Research Study Aims: • To identify factors related to entry to care • To identify pathways in placement careers Sample: • 294 children (Community Services NSW) • 0-15 years (40% under 5, 25% 6 – 10 years, 35% 11 years and over) • New entries to care • Follow up over 4 years

12. Methodology • Longitudinal, quantitative, data collected through personal interviews with frontline workers supplemented with case records • Event history analysis (proportional hazards model) to identify: 1) likelihood of reunification and 2) likelihood of placement change/breakdown • Influence of explanatory variables child related, parent related and placement related on outcome

13. Results • 20% were restored • Most restored children reunify in the first five months in care • 50% from their first placement • 26% from a second placement • 24% from subsequent placement • Declining rate of restoration with each subsequent placement

14. Restoration as event: all placements

15. Individual placement careers

16. Restoration – Significant Explanatory Variables • Sex– Girls can expect to remain in care 2.4 times as long before restoration as boys. • Accommodation– Children whose parents were living in public or transitory accommodation at the time of their entry to care expect to remain in care 6.28 times as long before restoration as children who have been in ownership or private accommodation. • Legal status – Children who enter care under court orders wait 7.38 times as long before restoration as children who enter care under voluntary, non court ordered arrangements. • Aboriginality– Children from Aboriginal backgrounds remain in care 5.26 times as long before restoration as children from non- Aboriginal backgrounds. • Number of Placements – Children who have experienced three or more placement changes wait 5.8 times as long before restoration in comparison with children who had one or two placements.

17. Restoration and Reasons for Care Arbitrary days comparison of time in care before restoration according to reason for placement

18. Previous SA research • 1998-1999 Longitudinal tracking study involving 235 children • Most reunification occurred within the 1st 4 months • Proportional hazard models showed that Aboriginal status, parental problems and neglect were the 3 strongest predictors

19. SA reunification patterns

20. Probability at 4 months

21. Conclusions / Implications • Both studies show probability of return decreases the longer children are in care • Highlight critical role of resources to support parents when children become involved in the care system • Aboriginal children spend longer in care before restoration in both studies • Need for further large scale research into factors associated with reunification and long term outcomes/effects of reunification

22. National Reunification project • University of Adelaide, University of NSW, ARC Linkage with partnerships with DFC (SA), DHS (Vic), CS (NSW), DHHS (TAS), DCS (QLD), DHCS (ACT) and FAHCSIA (Federal) • Reseachers: Paul Delfabbro, Lisa Kettler, University of Adelaide Elizabeth Fernandez, The University of New South Wales • Duration 2009-2012

23. Outline of National Project 2 Components • Component 1: National inter-jurisdictional study of reunification patterns and predictors • Component 2: Prospective study of reunification outcomes

24. Component 1 • System data, case-file and short case-worker interviews • Child and family predictors of reunification outcomes, placement movements • In progress. Total sample size 4000+ cases

25. Component 2 • Prospective longitudinal study of children going home. Baseline interviews with carers to assess functioning prior to exist and then + 6 and + 12 month follow-ups with families • Focus on family functioning, stability of the post-reunification outcomes

26. Assessing Successful and Unsuccessful Reunification • Examine children’s well being pre and post reunification • Compare outcomes for reunified children with those for similar children who remain in care for a similar period. • Track child protection interventions post reunification • Identify barriers to reunification • Identify best practice in reunification.