The Meaning of Family Preservation: Shared Mission, Diverse Methods

1995 ◽  
Vol 76 (10) ◽  
pp. 625-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Warsh ◽  
Barbara A. Pine ◽  
Anthony N. Maluccio
2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela Miller ◽  
Rob Nagby ◽  
Phil Breitenbucher ◽  
Tim S. Smith

Author(s):  
Richard J. Gelles

This chapter examines the child protective system in the United States by first examining the scaffolding created by federal legislation and federal funding. Next, it reviews three significant Supreme Court decisions that bear on the operation of child protective service systems. Lastly, it examines the common process and flow of individual cases of child abuse and neglect from initial reporting, through investigation, service response, possible out-of-home placement, and finally decisions regarding when and why to close the case. The conclusion discusses the three core goals of the child protective service system: safety and wellbeing of children; permanency of caregiving; and family preservation.


Author(s):  
Elizabeth S. Cole

The author discusses current challenges to increasing family-centered practice within child welfare agencies. The article focuses on two issues: (1) child welfare's collaboration with early-intervention and family-support services and (2) maintaining family-preservation services despite growing criticism of such services.


2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-36
Author(s):  
Frank Ainsworth

At the present time there is a need for a new generation of programs to address the needs of ‘at risk’ children and families. This is an issue that is exercising the minds of service planners in both government and non-government community service organisations. This need arises from the fact that many existing programs have yet to be rigorously evaluated and are of questionable effectiveness. This lack of evidence of effectiveness does not sit well in the current climate of accountability. It also runs contrary to the increasingly strident calls for evidence based practice.Many new programs arrive in Australia from the US as this country is often the source of program innovation as illustrated by the importation in the 1980s and 1990s of family preservation and family reunification programs. In the US, promotion of ‘model programs' has taken another step and a systematic effort at program replication is now in evidence. The question is, how might model programs from overseas be successfully replicated in Australia? And what is required, if anything, to replicate these models effectively taking account of our different cultural traditions?


1994 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Howard Bath

Family Preservation Services, and in particular the intensive variety, have recently been attracting a lot of attention in Australia, with initiatives in at least four states. Along with the enthusiasm there has been some hostility and opposition. This paper examines the context in which the services originally developed and attempts to rationally assess their relevance for Australia.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document