IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/cysrev/v34y2012i2p331-337.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Parents' perceptions of their participation in mandated family group meetings

Author

Listed:
  • Darlington, Yvonne
  • Healy, Karen
  • Yellowlees, Josephine
  • Bosly, Fiona

Abstract

In many developed countries, the right of parents involved in child protection to participate in decision-making is becoming incorporated into legislation and policy. In this article, we report findings from semi-structured interviews with 10 parents (5 mothers and 5 fathers) who participated in formal child welfare decision-making forums (Family Group Meetings) in Brisbane, Australia. The interviews focused on parents' experiences of the meetings, including factors that promote or inhibit participation. The themes of feeling respected by professionals, feeling that one's opinions were heard, and being supported at the meeting were all associated positive experiences of participation, and conversely, those parents who reported overall negative experiences spoke of not feeling respected, not having their opinions heard and not being supported during the meeting. Overall, parents demonstrated a relatively sophisticated understanding of the process; these findings suggest that parents have the capacity to participate meaningfully in child welfare decision-making forums, especially when given adequate support.

Suggested Citation

  • Darlington, Yvonne & Healy, Karen & Yellowlees, Josephine & Bosly, Fiona, 2012. "Parents' perceptions of their participation in mandated family group meetings," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 331-337.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:34:y:2012:i:2:p:331-337
    DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.10.030
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740911004117
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.10.030?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Darlington, Yvonne & Healy, Karen & Feeney, Judith A., 2010. "Challenges in implementing participatory practice in child protection: A contingency approach," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1020-1027, July.
    2. Aron Shlonsky & Kate Schumaker & Charlene Cook & David Crampton & Michael Saini & Elisabeth Backe‐Hansen & Krystyna Kowalski, 2009. "PROTOCOL: Family group decision making for children at risk of abuse and neglect," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), pages 1-33.
    3. Darlington, Yvonne & Healy, Karen & Feeney, Judith A., 2010. "Approaches to assessment and intervention across four types of child and family welfare services," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 356-364, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ahn, Haksoon & Xu, Yanfeng & Williams, Kimberly A. & Parks-Bourn, Kimberly & Williams, Syreeta & Conway, Denise, 2022. "Family team decision meeting and child welfare service disparities: The influence of race and poverty," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    2. Toros, Karmen & DiNitto, Diana Maria & Tiko, Anne, 2018. "Family engagement in the child welfare system: A scoping review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 598-607.
    3. Colvin, Marianna L. & Howard, Heather, 2022. "Hard to succeed: A call for social change from mothers with substance use in the child welfare system," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Toros, Karmen & DiNitto, Diana Maria & Tiko, Anne, 2018. "Family engagement in the child welfare system: A scoping review," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 598-607.
    2. Lehtme, Rafaela & Toros, Karmen, 2020. "Parental engagement in child protection assessment practice: Voices from parents," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    3. Davies, Kate & Ross, Nicola & Cocks, Jessica & Foote, Wendy, 2023. "Family inclusion in child protection: Knowledge, power and resistance," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    4. Rauktis, Mary Elizabeth & Bishop-Fitzpatrick, Lauren & Jung, Nahri & Pennell, Joan, 2013. "Family group decision making: Measuring fidelity to practice principles in public child welfare," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 287-295.
    5. Emily Keddell, 2014. "Current Debates on Variability in Child Welfare Decision-Making: A Selected Literature Review," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-25, November.
    6. Arbeiter, Ere & Toros, Karmen, 2017. "Participatory discourse: Engagement in the context of child protection assessment practices from the perspectives of child protection workers, parents and children," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 17-27.
    7. Darlington, Yvonne & Healy, Karen & Feeney, Judith A., 2010. "Challenges in implementing participatory practice in child protection: A contingency approach," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1020-1027, July.
    8. Schreiber, Jill C. & Fuller, Tamara & Paceley, Megan S., 2013. "Engagement in child protective services: Parent perceptions of worker skills," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 707-715.
    9. de Haan, Irene & Connolly, Marie, 2014. "Another Pandora's box? Some pros and cons of predictive risk modeling," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(P1), pages 86-91.
    10. Eunice Magalhães & Maria Manuela Calheiros & Carla Antunes, 2018. "‘I Always Say What I Think’: a Rights-Based Approach of Young People’s Psychosocial Functioning in Residential Care," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 11(6), pages 1801-1816, December.
    11. Gladstone, James & Dumbrill, Gary & Leslie, Bruce & Koster, Andrew & Young, Michelle & Ismaila, Afisi, 2014. "Understanding worker–parent engagement in child protection casework," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 56-64.
    12. Summers, Alicia & Wood, Steve M. & Russell, Jesse R. & Macgill, Stephanie O., 2012. "An evaluation of the effectiveness of a parent-to-parent program in changing attitudes and increasing parental engagement in the juvenile dependency system," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 2036-2041.
    13. Appleton, Jane V. & Terlektsi, Emmanouela & Coombes, Lindsey, 2013. "The use of sociograms to explore collaboration in child protection conferences," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 2140-2146.
    14. Platt, Dendy & Riches, Katie, 2016. "Assessing parental capacity to change: The missing jigsaw piece in the assessment of a child's welfare?," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 141-148.
    15. Damiani-Taraba, Gissele & Dumbrill, Gary & Gladstone, James & Koster, Andrew & Leslie, Bruce & Charles, Michelle, 2017. "The evolving relationship between casework skills, engagement, and positive case outcomes in child protection: A structural equation model," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 456-462.
    16. Serbati, Sara, 2017. "“You won't take away my children!” families' participation in child protection. Lessons since a best practice," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 214-221.
    17. Di Qi & Shiyou Wu, 2020. "How Good Are Child Vulnerability Assessment Tools in China?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-12, July.
    18. Havlicek, Judy & Lin, Ching-Hsuan & Villalpando, Fabiola, 2016. "Web survey of foster youth advisory boards in the United States," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 109-118.
    19. Tsantefski, Menka & Humphreys, Cathy & Jackson, Alun C., 2014. "Infant risk and safety in the context of maternal substance use," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(P1), pages 10-17.
    20. Toros, Karmen & Tiko, Anne & Saia, Koidu, 2013. "Child-centered approach in the context of the assessment of children in need: Reflections of child protection workers in Estonia," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 1015-1022.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:34:y:2012:i:2:p:331-337. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/childyouth .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.