oking after children
many 'looked-after' children are there? 169
Promotion of the child's welfare 172
Partnership with parents and carers 173
Policies, planning and decision-making 174
Evidence-basedpractice 175 6
The LookingAfter Children project 176
Selection of appropriate care options 180
Kinship care 181
Foster care 189
Separation issues 192
Varieties of residentialcare 193
Group care 194
Abuse of children in care 196
Alternative forms of residential care 199
Alternatives to residentialand foster care 200
Secure accommodation 201
The evolution of adoption in the United Kingdom 203
Open adoption 205
Inter-countryadoption 207
Same-race placements 208
Adoption by single people 208
Adoption by gays and lesbians 209
Adoption by foster parents 209
The legal framework 210
Case example 213
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
In the previous chapter, we talked about protecting children and
sider the various alternatives open to a child who is being 'looked after' b
local authority.
Objectives
When you have read this chapter, you should know what the term 'lo
after' means. You should understand recent trends in the numbers
government-produced Looking After Children (LAC) materials when work-
ing with children living away from their families. You should have a better ildren looked after by voluntary agreement from 17,300 in 1991 to
understanding of lunship care, foster care and residential care as ways of ,600 in 1995 (NCH Action for Children, 1996).
providing for children needing to be looked after. The chapter will also
cover secure accommodation and adoption practice, including a considera-
tion of 'open adoptions'. at are the general characteristics of 'looked-after' children?
eprivation is a common condition among young ~eoplewho are being
oled after. A study of 2,500 chil+en found that before entering the care
Children who are 'looked after' system, only a quarter were living with both parents. Around three-quarters
of their families received income support. Only one in five lived in owner-
Before we discuss the various alternatives open to children who are occupied housing, and over half were living in poor neighbourhoods (NCH
'looked after', it will be as well to note briefly a few facts about them - Action for Children, 1996).
including what exactly is meant by the term 'looked after'. The study found that additional factors which increased children's
chances of admission were: overcrowding, linked with large families; having
a young, often a teenage, mother; and having parents who came from dif-
What does the term 'looked-after'denote? ferent racial backgrounds from each other.
In England and Wales, social services for children and young people are The study's authors argue that it is probably not just the poverty of single
provided under the Children Act 1989. Under the Act, the term 'looked parents but also their lack of available social supports that increases the
after' denotes all children subject to a care order or who are provided with likelihood that their children will be placed away from home. Also high-
accommodation on a voluntary basis for more than 24 hours. This includes lighted is the interaction of environmental ~roblemsor disability and family
those children who are the subject of an emergency protection order, police stress, with breakdown. Indeed, a 'broken family' was found to be the factor
protection powers, or an interim or full care order. It includes children and most highly correlated with entry to care (Bebbington and Miles, 1987).
young people committed or remanded to local authority accommodation, or More recently, Jackson (1998, p. 47) has argued that:
made the subject of a residence requirement of a supervision order in crim- even when all the factors contributing to a likelihood of material disad-
inal proceedings, and those transferred to local authority accommodation vantage are combined, the chances are only one in ten that a child will
under the provisions of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. enter the care system. ...For this to happen.. .there have to be other fac-
Finally, it includes those accommodated in community homes following tors, most commonly the mental illness of a parent, domestic violence, or
sentence under Section 33 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1963 the physical andlor sexual abuse of the child. The family has probably
(NCH Action for Children, 1996). become isolated or alienated from friends and relatives or someone would
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
ble 6.1 Trends in child welfare in the twentieth century
rather than an institution.
which simply lack material resources. Adoptive Children belong in a permanent
family family: no child is unadoptable.
Age is also a factor. Approximately two-thirds (63 per cent) of chi1
accommodated are aged over 10 years. Between 1992 and 1995 the pro
Biological Children belong with their
tion of children aged 10 to 15 looked after in England rose from 39
parents biological parents: reasonable
cent of the total to 43 per cent (NCH Action for Children, 1996).
efforts must be made to maintain
the family.
Family continuity Extended Children belong in a family
Where are 'looked-after' childrenplaced? family network that continues
Almost two-thirds of children (65 per cent) looked after in England on 31
March 1995 had been laced with foster carers, while 17 per cent (8,200)
were in residential homes. Most of these youngsters (5,700) were placed in Id from the home, if this is consistent with the child's best interests, by
local authority community homes. In addition, an estimated 2,100 were
placed for adoption and 4,300 were laced with their parents (NCH Action ild must be removed, the goal is then to reunite the child with the family
for Children, 1996). The proportion of looked-after children fostered rose rapidly as possible, again consistent with the child's best interests. This
from 50 per cent in 1985 to 58 per cent by 1991, although the ~zzcnzberof isfawzil)~reu~z$catio~z. 4
children fostered fell by 2,000 during the same ~eriod.The number of Family reunification, usually the preferred goal for permanency plan-
these children in community homes fell from 23 per cent in 1985 to 14 per
cent by March 1995 (NCH Action for Children, 1996).
the planned process of reconnecting children in out-of-home care with
Principles of child placement
Principles and philosophies in child placement,
over time. For example, Table 6.1 depicts trends
latter part of the twentieth century. As the table
moved auite swiftlv from the idea that children
as.in anything else, evolve
in child welfare during the
shows, the progression has
ought to be brought up asI
normally as possible within a family rather than an institution, to the idea
that it ought to be a permanent family, to the idea that preferably it should
be their own family. With the diversification of the nuclear family (two bio-
logical parents bringing up their mutual children) into an increasing num-
ber of alternative family forms (for example, blended or reconstituted or
step-families, and single-parent families), the focus has shifted to maintain-
ing the child's ties with the family over time whether that family consists of
parents and siblings or the extended family network.
However, the Children Act 1989 supports the principle that, if at all
possible, children should still be cared for by their own biological families.
The primary goal of child welfare is therefore to prevent removal of the
their families by means of a variety of services and supports to the chil-
dren, their families and their foster parents or other service providers. It
aims to help each child and fainily to achieve and maintain, at any given
time, their optimal level of reconnection - froin full re-entry of the child
into the family system to other forms of contact such as visiting - that
affirms the child's membership in the family.
In earlier years, family reunification was viewed o1z1yas the physical return
of the child to parental care, with full parental rights returned, after a lim-
ited period of supervision. It is now seen as a continuum of relationship
and reconnection, an aclaowledgement of the importance of fainily conti-
nuity. A child may remain, for compelling reasons, in planned long-term
care but may still be reconnected to his or her parents.
Given these basic principles, we can also identify a number of other
guidelines for child-placement practice which are drawn from research. In
1991, the Department of Health published Patterns alzd Outconzes i ~ zChild
Placellzent (Department of Health, 1991d). This was intended as a sequel
to the 'Pink Book', Social Worlz Decisio~zsifz Child Care (Department of
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
Health and Social Security, 1985a). As with the earlier volume, routine termination of contact when a permanent placement is made
sually inappropriate.
vance to day-to-day practice. The review that follows is based on
key to discharge is visiting; contact is highly beneficial for children's
are and does not increase the risk of placement breakdown. Infor-
barriers to contact, such as the attitudes of foster carers and resi-
latives can offer stable placements, particularly in relation to long-
m placements; they are also a major source of family contact, and vis-
Promotionof the child's welfare s by grandparents, aunts and uncles can often be encouraged.
For the sake of brevity and clarity the principles drawn from the res oo little attention has been given to the role of siblings and other chil-
findings are resented below in point form. ren despite the fact that this factor is known to affect the outcome of
Preventative services, geared to family preservation, must involve a
bination of practical services and help with family relationships,
siblings is usually beneficial and highly valued by the children con-
should focus on the functioning of family and social networks. i
ed. Equally, it is clear that o'ther youngsters can be a source of stress
er than support. Thus, caregivers must be aware of the need to pro-
children and not leave them to 'fight their own battles'.
r black and ethnic minorities; the findings should be translated into
m Greater attention must be given to the health and educational ne
nitored. In addition, special attention should be given to children
remedial help and treatment to overcome the adverse effects of d
tion and abuse. ortionate numbers. More attention must be given to what the
se 'cultural issues' means in relation to direct work with children
nd families and the provision of s e ~ c e s .
portance of partnership with parents and carers is another primary
who find it difficult to use respite services.
self-awareness on the part of practitioners and the ability to
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
decisions will be flawed. They may even be dangerous if risks and ben e working party identified the failure to specify outcomes as a signifi-
fits are not analysed and balanced objectively. ant weakness of the child-welfare system. As one member of the working
(Department of Health, 1991d, p. 7 ty, Sonia Jackson (1998, pp. 48-9), succinctly puts it: 'there is no way of
essing outcomes if you do not Imow what you are aiming at'. Moreover,
To be sure, social work is more than a science; it inevitably involves sessment of outcomes can only occur in relation to some kind of stan-
emphasis on empathy, negotiation and building relationships. Howev rd and someone has to set the standard'. The working party came to the
'perhaps the most important message from recent research is that nclusion that many of the shortcomings of the system were attributable
progress is to be made in developing professional standards in the car the fact that, in the majority of child-care cases,
children, then more attention must be given to scientific discipline
dealing with evidence' (Department of Health, 1991d, p. 78). ere was no one person monitoring the developmental process of the
We come now to a discussion of the Loolung After Children materia ild in the informal and perhaps hardly conscious way that most par-
which are designed to improve the parenting experiences of childre ts do and taking corrective action if necessary. In devising the assess-
looked after by local authorities and which identify a number of pointers for ment scheme, therefore, we decided to base it on the aspirations and
practice. behaviour of 'ordinary' parents. What aspects of development are consid-
ered important by parents bringing up their own children? What do they
do to try to promote good outcomes for their children?
The LookingAfter Children project The working party's deliberations resulted in the production of the Looking
ter Children (LAC) materials, which are designed to improve the parent-
The extensive child-care research undertaken in the 1980s and summarised mg experience of children looked after by local authorities and other agen-
in Patterns and Outconzes (Department of Health, 1991d) showed that the es. The first stage of the LAC project is reported in Loolzing After
child-care system was failing badly when judged by the outcomes for ch hildren: Assessing Ozttconze in Child Care (Parker et al., 1991).This ~ a c k -
dren and young people. All aspects of their development - educatio e of materials attracted widespread interest, which encouraged the
health, relationships, employment and identity - were found to be more epartment of Health to engage in a programme of research and develop-
problematic than those of children cared for by their own families or ment into the application of the LAC materials to social-work practice and
adopted at a young age. issues surrounding their use. This work is reported in full in Looking After
A number of studies have since highlighted the extremely poor prospects Children: Research into Practice (Ward, 1995).
of care leavers, 'who are many times more likely than their peers to experi- The research and development work included testing the materials with
ence illiteracy, homelessness, unemployment, early parenthood, problems a group of 379 children living at home to establish whether the forms
with drugs and alcohol and imprisonment'. It may be further noted that the reflect the expectations held by families in the community for their own
Education Reform Acts of the Conservative government mean that many children. The acceptability and usefulness of the materials to social work-
looked-after children are in danger of being excluded altogether from the ers, caregivers, children and young people looked after away from home
educational process (Jackson, 1998, p. 48). One research study showed was also evaluated using a group of 204 children in care or in accommoda-
that children usually bring their educational problems with them when they tion in five local authorities.
enter care or accommodation. Unfortunately, the experience of being In the light of the results of research and development work, the original
looked after away from home all too frequently does little to ameliorate LAC materials were significantly revised. They were then launched by the
these deficits (Heath, Colton and Aldgate, 1989 and 1994). Secretary of State for Health in May 1995. This heralded the start of a
Towards the end of the 1980s, the Department of Health and Social highly effective dissemination and implementation programme. Thirty-nine
Security suggested that an independent working party be set up to consider local authorities in England agreed to implement the LAC materials in
the question of outcomes in child care (Parker et al., 1991). Specifically, 1995196 with support from the Department of Health.
the working party was asked to consider how the experience of being The materials have been widely adopted throughout the UK. It is esti-
lool~edafter in the public care system affects the quality of life and life mated that by the end of 1998 the system was being operated by 90 per
chances of children and young people. cent of English authorities and the majority of those in Wales, Scotland,
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
and Northern Ireland. The Central Council for Education and Trai
The LAC materials promote good parental care by identibng the
ences, concerns and expectations of children at different ages and stag
through highlighting the likely impact of different actions. In a nutshe
they introduce ideas about the outcome of social-work practice.
They also facilitate discussion of the difficulties as well as succ
ntinuity in the lives of looked-after children to avoid the damaging levels
disruption highlighted by previous research.
A new research programme, funded by the Department of Health, has
een set up to show how 'the data contained in Assessment and Action
poor outcomes for children.
The materials are an integrated package which helps social workers and
caregivers to set an agenda for work with children and young people, and
ackson, 1998,p. 53).
ensure that these plans are acted upon. By assessing children's progress
across a range of developmental dimensions including health and educa-
tion, they direct attention to the ordinary everyday goals of parenting, and countered some resistance from social workers, mainly on the practical
ensure that all essential information is recorded in one accessible place and
is regularly updated. They encourage workers to listen attentively to chil-
dren and young people and reflect on their successes as well as their prob-
lems and they strengthen partnerships between children and young people,
parents, teachers and others. They rationalise docuinentation and create ssessment and Action Records for imposing white middle-class assump-
consistency across agencies, thereby facilitating improvements in the qual-
ity of care provided. hip underpinning the Children Act 1989, and for blaming individuals
The LAC materials include Pla+zlzi.ngand Review Fon~zsand Assessnzejzt
and Action Records. The Planning and Review Forms are records which
hold the essential information that is too often lost, for children who spend Looking After Children model. However, she contends that Knight and
time in public care. They contain key details about the child's health and Caveney's views reflect a misunderstanding of the LAC approach and 'a
educational achievements, and his or her family. They also record formal classbound view of parenting which would deny looked after children the
agreements about placements and other issues appropriate to short- and chance of a better quality of adult life than their families' experience'.
long-term planning. Jackson accepts that implementing LAC is not an alternative to tackling
The Assessment and Action Records centre on the child's developmen- widespread inequality and discrimination, but argues that the Assessment
tal needs, the quality of day-to-day care and the actions necessaly to pro- and Action Records increase the likelihood that social workers and care-
mote good outcomes. When used over time they enable agencies to assess givers will address key aspects of children's development; they also help
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
those responsible to understand better how their actions or inactions
tribute to child-care outcomes.
least in relation to race, sexual orientation and disability. These pri
are discussed in Chapter 7.
Having discussed the principles underlying work with looked-after
dren, we come now to the selection of appropriate care options for the
Selection of appropriate care options
nts, small or family-type group homes in which the caregivers act as
and few empirical data exist to help decide which option would best s
particular child. Nevertheless, there are certain guidelines to aid in se
ing a placement. One of these is the degree of restrictiveness or contr child and parent in placement, as will some family foster homes.
esidential cnre is recommended for young people who display behaviour
home or with a relative is the least restrictive while being kept in secur
gressive way or posing a danger to themselves or others. Youths who have
residential care, fall between the extremes on the restrictiveness cont fficulty forming relationships with parenting figures because of past nega-
uum. In order, from least to most restrictive, options might e experiences may do better in a residential setting. For some parents, it
rated as follows: be more comfortable to see tljeir children placed in residential care
use they do not have to watcPother 'parents' succeeding where they
Least restrictive Living at home or with a relative (kinship care)
d not. Residential care is more commonly preferred in Europe than it is
Ordinary foster care
the United Kingdom where practice is toward moving young people back
om institutional settings into the community.
Having briefly described the various options, we will now explore each in
Most restrictive Secure accommodation
Apart from restrictiveness, other guidelines focus on the best fit between
the child's needs and the characteristics of the placement, talung into
account the principle of family continuity.
Kinship placenzents are often preferred as they promote the continuity of
relationships for the child in a familiar environment. They provide a place-
ment within the child's own ethnic/cultural group and are less likely to be
disrupted than placements with non-relatives. They are not appropriate if
the relative cannot establish boundaries with the parent or is afraid of the
parent, or there is any indication that the relative may have abused the par-
ent or child or supported the parent's maltreatment of the child.
Fatlzily foster homes are preferred over group homes for the majority of
children. For infants and preschool-age children, a family setting is almost
mandatory except for those with very severe problems who require spe-
cialised care. For children who are able to participate in family life, attend
Kinship care
As we have seen, the focus in the 1990s has turned increasingly towards
family continuity. This concept emphasises the necessity for continuing
important relationships across the lifespan and acknowledges that children
need to be embedded in family and community networks. Even when chil-
dren cannot live with their biological families and must move away from
familiar communities, continuity can be maintained by involving their fami-
lies in alternative living situations such as foster care, residential care and
adoption. The importance of the continuity of kinship ties was emphasised
by Joan Laird when she said in 1979:
Human beings are profoundly affected by the family system of which
they are a part. IGn ties are powerful and compelling, and the individual's
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
sense of identity and continuity is formed not only by the si er identified the same person in only 17 of the 41 cases: and only 3 of
attachments in his intimate environment but also is deeply roote 1 people nominated as most influential had attended the young per-
biological family- in the genetic link that reaches back into the pa last formal review.
ahead into the future. Ecologically oriented child welfare rsh remarked that 'potential family support for young people leaving
attends to, nurtures and supports the biological family. Furth esembles a target' (Marsh, 1999, p. 13). At the centre of the target
when it is necessary to substitute for the biological family, good y kin' who are likely to be proactive about involving themselves in the
dictates that every effort be made to preserve and protect imp person's life and are very important both emotionally and practically.
ship ties. (Laird, 1979, p. 175) ext ring contains kin who are not proactive but are willing to become
ed if approached; and the furthest ring contains kin who are known to
Nowadays, we tend not to talk about 'substitute' parents oung person but are unlikely to want to become involved. Although
the term 'foster parent' is being replaced by 'foster carer' in recogn h was talking about kinship involvement with young people leaving
the belief that parents in the foster family do not, and should his model of the kinship support system as a target with a centre and
expected to, replace the child's own parents: they are complernenta and outer rings would be just as applicable to young people in care or
substitute adult figures in the child's life. g looked after. If we accept that social workers are unlikely to be famil-
Ideas about what constitutes a 'family' are also continuing to chan th kin in the inner ring - that is, kin who are not proactive but would
social-work practice, 'family' has often been synonymous with 'h lling if approached - then it seems that a potential source of valuable
and, in the high proportion of cases where the household is hea ort for young people is being overlooked.
single female, has sometimes come to mean 'mother'. Social worlce what degree lun support should be extended to providing a home for
consider involved step-parents as 'family' but wider patterns of lun young person - to what degree, that is, kinship care should be an
often overlooked. A recent study by Peter Marsh (Marsh, 1999) e epted part of the foster-care system - is still a matter for debate.
the definition of 'family' by young people leaving care, and compa cates of lunship care point ouqthat the trauma of placement may be
family tree constructed by the young person with the same family tree c sed if children can be with extended family members.
structed by the young person's social worker. Cousins were the g the child 'in the family' is likely to ensure that cultural traditions
group of relatives in the family tree drawn by the young person, foll aintained, particularly if the child is a member of a minority ethnic
maternal and paternal uncles and aunts, who together accounted f and could not otherwise be placed with foster carers of the same cul-
one-third of the relatives named. Full siblings and other siblings c 1 background. Ties to relatives will be strengthened and will serve to
for another third. There were some interesting differences in mater ce the child's sense of belonging and identity. Moreover, some stud-
paternal liin groups, as maternal uncles and aunts accounted for ve shown that kinship homes are less likely than non-related place-
cent of relatives but paternal for only 10 per cent. This pattern was r to be disrupted and more likely to keep children until they reach
eated in other areas: for example, three times as many maternal as pat (Berrick, Barth and Needell, 1993).Thus, kinship care can satisfy
grandparents were named. Young people were obviously more familia roponents of permanency and those who believe that family preser-
their mother's side of the family. Step-parents accounted for only should be paramount.
cent of the relatives listed and sometimes included previous step-pa ever, kinship homes can also have their drawbacks. If the lun home
who continued to be important figures for the child even when they e same, sometimes quite disadvantaged community as the parental
no longer the parent's partner. Other examples of unrelated ~eople e, children will maintain their ties not only with relatives but with
loolced on as 'family' included previous foster parents and family fri s who are still engaging in the kinds of negative activities the child is
who had achieved the status of honorary aunts or uncles. trying to avoid. In the same vein, lun may have shared with the child's
On average, family trees constructed by social workers contained just a1parent a disadvantaged upbringing and may be struggling with many
per cent of the relatives named by the child. Social workers showed g same problems which afflict the biological home. In addition, where
knowledge of parents and full siblings but knew less about grandpare ct with the natural parent is not advised - where continuing abuse is
and even less about aunts and uncles. They fell down, too, when it came nger, for example - kin may have more difficulty in denying the parent
identifpg the most influential person in a child's life. They and the ss to the child than would a non-related caregiver. From the social
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
184 An introductionto working with children
worker's point of view, lin carers are less likely to see themselves as
less interested in cooperating with agencies in the interests of the
re, transportation or other forms of support.
care is often a very appropriate la cement option, safety and pr
issues must be addressed through a careful assessment of the
and Practice Committee recommend consideration of the following fa
in assessment (Child Welfare League of America, 1994, pp. 44-5): th other ethnic-minority peoples - for example, Aboriginal bands in
anada and the United States - as well as with inembers of the dominant
0 The nature and quality of the relationship between the child and t
relative;
The ability and desire of the linship carer to protect the child fro
further maltreatment;
Featherstone, 1991).
of the child with lun; Adapting the family decision-making model to a UK setting raises a .
Any family dynamics in the kinship home related to the abuse or negl number of issues, including legal constraints regarding confidentiality,
of the child; court processes and liability. A major issue is control. Child-welfare prac-
tice has traditionally focused on control by the social worker and it may be
difficult for some social workers to engage in a process that hands control
back to the family. Although a major thrust of the Children Act 1989 is
towards ~artnershipwith parents, parents still often feel that they do not
have equal decision-making power with social workers (Colton et a].,
1995a) and some social workers still feel that parents do not have the
expertise necessary to make decisions in the best interests of their children.
For example, there is some debate over whether a kinship home should be
required to meet the same standards as any other foster home or whether
the standards should be relaxed somewhat, particularly if the home is going
to be approved for one particular child and not for foster children in gen-
eral. A kinship home selected through a family conference may fall short of
resources and are better educated. accepted standards in many respects; and social workers may be reluctant
A genuine concern in placing children with relatives, ~articularl~older to implement a family decision that they personally do not agree with.
relatives, is whether these adults have enough supports available in the Accepted standards include not only the level of care provided to the
community to help them in their efforts with the child. Use of an ecomap child but the level of training achieved by the foster carer. A high propor-
(see Chapter 4) can help to determine which supports are available and tion of kinship carers are grandparents who brought up their own children
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
Is for abandonment of the family reunification/family preservation model
e are not sure under what circumstances family preservation is a peni-
the sole or even main means of treating and preventing child mal-
atment. (pp. 558-9)
lles points out that it is unpopular to argue against family preservation
ause it draws support both from the Right, who want limited interven-
n into the private sphere, and from the Left, who think it consistent with
om a feminist perspective, the American writer Bernard (1992) exam-
the 'dark side' of family preservation, noting that the American family
one of the country's most violent institutions and a cornerstone of
men's oppression. She cautions readers to:
The argument about the government's responsibility towards kin care
talang place both in a context of fiscal restraint and in relation to anot (1993) reminds social workers that family-preservation intervention is
tem. It said:
determined to patch up troubled parents and preserve families. De
mounting evidence that family preservation programs aren't wor
child welfare policy remains so focused on reuniting families that
original aim - keeping children safe - has become almost secondary.
( p 553)
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
On the other side of the debate, Seader also argues that it is no
family-preservation philosophy which is at fault but the way that servi type of foster care - linship care - has been discussed above.
are provided. 'Services are limited because of agency biases, worker c ver, when we speak of foster care, we tend to think of care by parent
tencies, available community resources and so forth' (Gambrill and who are unrelated to the child, and indeed, most children looked
1993, pp. 60-1). Also in Gambrill and Stein (1993, p. 65), Nelson y local authorities are fostered by people unrelated to them.
that family preservation is not indiscriminately applied to all families ing is as old as human history in the sense that, through time, lost
ing the child-welfare system and that family-preservation workers doned children have been brought up by people who were not
selves typically recommend placement outside the family in from ir birth parents. However, the origins of formal fostering have been
cent to 50 per cent of their cases. Where family-preservation effo ed to the wet-nursing system that developed in France around the fif-
made, improvement in family functioning is an essential criterion for enth centuiy. Formal fostering - that is, fostering sanctioned by law -
ing the child to remain in the home. e to Britain with the foundling hospitals of the eighteenth century but,
Maluccio, Pine and Warsh (1994) acknowledge that family preserv e name suggests, the children placed in foster homes under that sys-
is viewed as competing with child protection and in particular cases it m ere babies. In the nineteenth century, a number of philanthropic
be incompatible. However, in its defence, they state, 'At the philosophic anisations began to develop in response to the Poor Law and its per-
and policy levels, family preservation and child protection are complemen d shortcomings in relation to the provision for children: there has
tary rather than competing values. In essence, the best way to protect chil- s been a close association between poverty and the numbers of chil-
dren is to preserve as much of their families as ~ossible'(P. 295). requiring substitute care outside their families (Triseliotis, 1997).
Kinship care satisfies both camps in that it preserves the extended family owever, it was feared that the fostering of older children would under-
if not the nuclear family and, at the same time, it is a placement which can the deterrent element of the Poor Law, and thus, unlike in Scotland,
ensure the safety of the child. However, the inajor issues associated with it, children were not fostered in England until after 1860. Indeed, main-
particularly standards and resourcing in comparison with those of non- am fostering as it is currently hderstood was not introduced until the
related carers, remain to be addressed.
vj:
ildren Act 1948. Prior to this, fostering was mainly a long-term arrange-
Before leaving linship care, it is as well to say a few words about infor- ent, but the 1948 Act extended it to include fostering as a temporary ser-
ma1 kinship care where the child-welfare system is not involved at all and ce to children and families.
the child merely goes to live with a relative. In these cases, the child may In the United lngdom and Ireland, the vast majority of children placed
receive excellent care without the stigma that child-welfare involvement ay from home are living in foster care. In these countries, residential
still seems to convey despite our best efforts to create a non-stigmatising titutions have largely - and many believe, wrongly - become places of
system. On the other hand, no formal supports are available to the carer resort, reserved for children whose severe difficulties make them
and the child may face the same rislcs that child-welfare legislation was nsuitable for foster care or whose foster-care placements have broken
designed to avoid: lack of permanency ~lanning;lack of services to the own. However, the balance between foster and residential care varies
child and family; and lack of re-placement screening and post-placement arkedly across the European Union. In the southern states of the EU -
s u p e ~ s i o n . reece, Portugal, Spain - children living away from home are overwhelm-
Informal care by kin is an integral part of many cultures and we do not gly placed in residential care. In Belgium, Germany and Italy, residential
lmow how many children are diverted from the formal system in this way, facilities also accommodate the majority of children in care. In Denmark,
nor what befalls them. For some parents and kin, escape from state inter- France and the Netherlands, roughly equal proportions of children are
vention and control may well outweigh the benefits, often meagre, which placed in foster care and residential care (Ruxton, 1996). It is thus appar-
kin would receive were they part of the formal system. If we believe that ent that the choice between foster and residential care is more a matter of
the advantages of informal kinship care are greater than the risks, then we philosophy than a reasoned decision about which setting would most bene-
need do nothing to change this attitude. If, on the other hand, we believe fit a particular child in his or her particular situation.
that the rislcs are greater than the advantages, then it behoves us to offer Wagner (1988) argues that residential and foster care are most fruitfully
more emotional and material support to formal lunship carers than we do at conceived as complementary approaches for children and families. There
present.
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
should be no question of which is 'better', but only of which is b
this particular child. For some young ~eople,residential care is a p
choice rather than a last resort. For example, Triseliotis (1997)repor
an unresolved issue concerns the role foster care should play in the
ment of adolescents. Some have claimed that the majority of teenage nctions of foster homes. No longer is a foster home just a foster
. It may be short-term or long-term, ordinary, or treatmentlspecial. In
successfully fostered. Recent studies carried out by Triseliotis su
roughly half of young people and their parents refer foster home environment for the child but is not responsible for the child's
favour residential care. The same study indicates that teenagers' ss towards treatment goals. Responsibility for therapeutic progress
tions (Triseliotis, 1997). foster homes, the carer is considered part of the treatment team and
Children come into foster care for a variety of reasons. One
child's physical, mental or emotional handicap (Tatara, 1993).Whil
social worlcer and family, and often with a number of other profes-
involved with the child. The traditional definition of fostering as
after other people's children as if they were one's own' no longer
in any sphere of foster care. The children are not the foster carer's
ant in the child's life. Nor is the looking after a matter restricted to
bers of a team, whose goal is achievement of the child's permanency
and whose activities include sharing information, planning collabora-
addressing issues of power and control, establishing specific plans
ime frames, negotiating who will do what, managing conflict, making
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
decisions and evaluating team effort. 'Ordinary' as well as 'specialistJc
trained, reimbursed and supported. ntal consequences of long-term foster care. It was also found that the
ing foster carers into categories and treating the categories differen
unwarranted and divisive. Indeed, certain districts in Canada have a
e study. Children who identified primarily with the foster carer or who
the placement of children wherever a bed was available rather than acc
ing to the best fit between carer and child. This unplanned 'expe ost problematic groups were those children with mixed identification (who
uld not decide where they belonged) and those with foster-carer identifi-
than those in ordinary - and much cheaper - foster homes. Of course, su
after-the-fact results cannot be generalised to other settings and certain
Varieties of residential care
research needs to be done both with respect to process (What actual Some children are not able to tolerate the intimacy of family life and do
occurs in specialist as compared with ordinary foster care?) and outcomes better in a residential facility. Residential centres vary considerably in size,
(Do high-needs children do better in specialist homes?). from large barrack-like institutions to small-group homes accommodating
no more than three or four adolescents. Because of the trend towards
strengthening foster care and maintaining birth families, the number of
Separation issues children placed in residential care bas been declining. However, the needs
Children entering foster care have experienced a variety of situations but of that number are greater than was the case, say, ten or twenty years ago
most have in common a background of insufficient parental nurturing, because the young people now admitted to residential care are often those
exposure to intra-familial or extra-familial violence, and a separation from with serious difficulties, for whom foster care is not an appropriate place-
attachment figures. ment, or for whom foster care has failed to produce the desired effect.
Our current focus is on the other side of the same coin: not on depriva- Indeed, in the United Ingdom, one of the main taslts of the residential
tion or separation but on the child's attachl~zelztto parenting figures. As pre- sector is to help deal with the aftermath of fostering brealtdown. Even in
the days when fostering was reserved for younger and non-problematic chil-
that endures over time. By the age of eighteen months, children are usual1 dren, breakdowns sometimes reached 50 per cent (Triseliotis, 1997).
attached to more than one individual, with fathers and siblings sharing the The historical antecedents of residential care in western Europe can be
traced back as far as the Middle Ages. The roots of current approaches,
Preserving the attachment to parents, siblings and other kin is an important however, are more readily found in the nineteenth century when very large
goal of contemporary child-welfare practice. Fahlberg (1991) has described residential institutions were erected in many countries. These institutions
the critical role of foster parents in nurturing the child's ability to attach, were usually administered by churches and charities and were charac-
preserving the child's attachment to parents, and helping to build attach- terised by regimented regimes founded on discipline, training and religion.
inent with members of the biological family or with adoptive parents. Their purpose was twofold: to care for the destitute and abandoned, whilst
Closely alun to attachment is the concept of identity. Children's ideas protecting society from the perceived threat to social order posed by 'dan-
about who they are and where and with whom they belong have a major gerous' children (Rwrton, 1996). As Hendriclt (1994) observes, children
impact on their adjustment in placement and on the success of efforts at play a dual role, both then and now: as 'victims' but also as 'threats'.
reunification. To understand more about the identity issues of children in After a long period of stagnation, following the Second World War, there
foster care, Weinstein (1960)interviewed 61 children five years old or older was renewed interest in residential care across Europe. Experiments were
who had been in placement for at least one year. He found that continuing undertaken with democratic forms of communal living, with 'children's
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
Looking after children 195
republicsJ and 'children's communities'. Yet by the close of the 1960s, r etting has a number of advantages. It can allow greater variation in behav-
dential institutions were attacked for having repressive regimes and failing ur than a family unit and the impact of difficult behaviour - acting out -
provide individualised care. The following three decades saw the progressi 1s reduced because it is diffused among a series of adults, who do shift
decline of residential care in all European Countries. This trend has bee work rather than being on duty 24 hours a day. The young person has an
fuelled by a corresponding growth in foster-family care. (Ruxton, 1996). opportunity for a variety of interpersonal relationships with different adults
The decline of residential care across the European Union has be nd with peers who share the same experiences day by day. A broad range
accompanied by an increasing movement away from large-scale resident f remedial and therapeutic programmes and group activities can be
provision towards smaller-scale units. However, although castles and ot rought together in the home and made available for planning positive
large structures are no longer fitted out for the purpose of accommoda aily-living experiences. The accessibility of the child to the staff facilitates
separated children, the development of smaller living units in some is or her diagnosis, observation and treatment. Therapy for emotional
countries has been slow (Colton and Hellinckx, 1993). Nor has the mo problems, remedial programmes for learning problems and controls for
towards a smaller scale resulted in the complete abolition of large institu- behavioural problems can be integrated and related directly to the young
tions. Often, the older, large-scale structures have been split up into daily life. The consistent routine of group care can contribute to a
smaller units. Thus, several small-group homes may be located on one site. sense of continuity, regularity and stability for a disturbed youth. Many
In addition, a large institution may seive as the operational centre for a net- young people requiring group care come from very disorganised home envi-
work of smaller units dispersed throughout the locality. Whilst operating on ronments and need structure to help them learn impulse control.
a small scale does not by itself ensure successful outcomes, research sug- Specific approaches used in a planned, therapeutic, group environment
gests that small-scale homes are more conducive to child-oriented care include individual psychotherapy, behaviour modification, play therapy, art
practice than are large establishments. therapy, group work and a positive peer culture. Although individual psy-
I11 addition to size, residential provisions can be classified in terms of the chotherapy was dominant in earlier times, it has largely been replaced by
age of the youngsters accommodated or the articular type of service various forms of group work and behaviour modification as preferred mod-
offered. One of the major types of residential care throughout Europe is els of treatment. In all such a$$roaches, an attempt is made to use the
'children's homes', which look after children who do not have behaviour everyday living environment as a therapeutic tool. Staff have the task of
problems, or whose problems in this respect are not severe. Children's
homes range from relatively large, multi-purpose, facilities to smaller hostel
and family-group provisions.
A few years ago, a key function of residential institutions was to act as
'assessment centres'. Such centres used to accommodate children of all
ages for short periods of time, usually with the aim of observing the child's
behaviour to ascertain what sort of help was required. Over the last fifteen
years or so, this form of residential care has been severely criticised. It is
argued that, rather than being undertaken in 'artificial' residential environ-
ments, assessment should take place in the family unit. Further, it is diffi-
cult in practice to separate care and treatment from assessment, and many
children remained in assessment centres for lengthy periods. Although a
number of countries, including Denmark, have retained assessment cen-
tres, they have been closed in the UIC.
malcing desired behaviours and consequences explicit to residents and of
managing the system of rewards and punishments necessary to reinforce
expectations. Common techniques include token economies, in which
young people work for points or tokens to attain various levels of privilege.
Group-work approaches have emphasised social and peer supports and
sanctions as a means of establishing new patterns of behaviour. Youths are
given selected responsibilities for the day-to-day running of the house and
for governing their own and each other's behaviour. In some cases, recre-
ational challenges such as camps and nature trips are used to strengthen
young people's perceptions of responsibility to the peer-group goals.
Despite the many advantages, certain problems are common to most
group homes. One is resistance from individuals and groups in the neigh-
bourhood. Neighbours may be afraid that the presence of the group home
will threaten the peace, safety or property values of the neighbourhood. In
addition, group homes are open systems and must function in cooperation
with a number of constituencies such as schools, police, and community
Group care
recreational and other facilities. Thus, community relations are of prime
Group homes are small residential units in which five or six children, usu- importance and must be proactively built and maintained. Useful strategies
ally adolescents, are cared for by house parents who work in shifts. A group include efforts to involve the community in every stage of planning before
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
d Barbara Kahan, relate:
vast majority of children who undeiwent the regime perceived
tional control: baths on admission, special clothing, strict routine, seg-
gation and isolation, humiliation and inappropriate bed-times.
(Levy and Kahan, 1991,p. 167)
around the abuse of children in residential facilities.
Abuse of children in care
notes:
vation of rights and ~rivileges;inhumane treatment; poor healt
education.
The abuse of children in residential institutions is particularly disturbi
given that many such children have already been deeply harmed prior t
two-thirds of those in residential institutions have been abused before en
'Pindown'. This term was coined by the senior manager directly respon
by Staffordshire County Council. Increasing public and media interest was
reflected by a Granada Television World in Action programme shown
nationally on 25 June 1990. Four days later, an independent inquiry was
set up by the besieged local authority (Levyand Kahan, 1991).
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
hildren placed away from home, and improving the regulation of the
ecruitment of staff working with children.
Maggie Charnock (1998, p. 2), a member of the steering group for the
asbility study by the National Voice for Young People, argues that many
Compensation Board will ultimately exceed E40 million. re, including professionals, members of the public, the police, insurance
ompanies and even a number of local authorities. She believes that this
ttitude is born out of 'careism' - a term which denotes prejudice against
oung people on the grounds of their care status. To tackle the abuse of
as general psychopathology, anxiety, depression, aggression, low s hildren and young people in care, she recommends that 'careism' should
esteem, sexual problems, physical symptoms, cognitive disability, devel e recognised and abolished. She also recommends that a national organi-
sation should be set up to give a voice for young people in care and that
(Colton and Vanstone, 1996). Significantly, at least 12 suicides of fo those responsible for abuse, including local authorities, should face crimi-
residents in children's homes in North Wales have been linked to the a
they suffered as children in care (NCH Action for Children, 1996).
of Health, based on a review established in 1996 in response to ongoi
ternative forms of residential care
Recently, attempts have been made to develop new, creative forms of resi-
1997).The report confirms that Britain is failing to provide adequately f dential care. These include 'communes' in Germany, which offer shelter to
children living away from home. Far fewer children are now placed in resl- g people who volunteer to live together, and attend school for voca-
dential care than was the case 20 years ago. Moreover, residential homes
are much smaller today, with an average of 10 child-care places per home.
Nevertheless, Sir William argues that the danger of child abuse remains an
ever-present threat. The report finds that over a third of children in resi-
dential care are not receiving an education; it also condemns inadequate mum of adult supervision.
staffing and the placement of vulnerable children alongside other young- In Germany, small autonomous units have formed networks with one
sters who are likely to bully them. Whilst acknowledging that the care of another to provide a wider range of programmes and activities, which can
children looked after by local authorities has improved, the report contends be shared by youngsters from all the units within the network. This
that progress is unsatisfactory and greater regulation is necessary. of resources makes for economies of scale, and helps to overcome the high
The quality of foster care is also criticised. This includes the inadequate costs which otherwise discourage the development of smaller units.
regulation of foster carers, whose difficulties in coping with complex and In view of the evidence that residential care is increasingly reserved for
stressful tasks can result in abuse or bullying. more challenging children and young people, there is an obvious need for
Sir William's main criticisms on the quality of care for children placed small-scale facilities which offer effective help to such youngsters. In
away from home were: inappropriate residential-care placements, poor Germany and Ireland, small-scale, specialised facilities have been set up
standards of health and education in residential care, inadequate regulation for children and adolescents with severe behavioural difficulties. A number
of foster carers, no inspection of residential special schools, and children in of projects have been developed in Germany for young drug addicts and
prison sharing accommodation with adult offenders. runaways. Residential workers in Germany have given increasing attention
To ameliorate these problems, Sir William recommended a comprehen- to the problems experienced by girls and young women, in particular those
sive strategy for residential care, legislation to regulate private foster care, who have been sexually abused. In the UK, attempts have been made to
extending the Children Act 1989 to include regulation of all boarding improve practice in relation to overcoming the special difficulties encoun-
schools, linlung residential and foster care to facilitate more choice of tered by children and young people from different ethnic backgrounds
placements, giving greater attention to the educational and health needs of (Colton and Hellinckx, 1993).
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
Alternatives to residential and foster care iend or has maintained contact with a former foster carer, there is no-
third alternative to foster and residential settings is cerztres for honze-
1 times each week, family members receive training in relation to the
cal and social aspects of family life. This intervention addresses the
re accommodation
there are strict criteria governing its use. A local authority may only
maintaining the care of their children. (i) he has a history of absconding and is likely to abscond from any
other description of accommodation; and
ii) if he absconds he is likely to suffer significant harm;
that if he is kept in any other d$scription of accommodation he is likely
to injure himself or any other pkrsons.
(ChildrenAct 1989, Section 25(1))
for a maximum of 72 hours without a court order, although the direct
f 13 can be placed in secure accommodation. If the local authority wishes
er a period of 28 days, they must obtain a court order.
The restrictions on the use of secure accommodation do not apply to
are finally able to establish independence. For youngsters leaving hildren detained under mental-health legislation. However, they do apply
the situation is fraught with additional practical and emotional diffic o all children in residential care, nursing or mental nursing homes.
to a laclc of readiness for employment, as well as scant survival ski
ental responsibility may at any time remove a child in accommodation
household management. At an emotional level, the separation from ose liberty is being restricted.
cause the child to re-experience the original loss of parenting fig
and the subsequent losses inherent in changing placements. Before
move to independence, there was the social worker and perhaps a fo urt). If made, the order may be for up to three months. This may be
carer or child-care worker. Now, unless the child has a supportive rela enewed on application to the court for periods of up to six months.
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
202 An introductionto working with children Looking after children 203
Applications for children on remand are made to the youth or other this rotten apple might then stand to inherit the worldly goods that decent
magistrate's court, and, if granted, last for the duration of the remand or for adoptive parents had worked so hard for. Attitudes have changed since
a maximum of 28 days. then and in 1993 the total number of adoptions in England and Wales was
Where an order for secure accommodatioi~is granted, the local authori 6,859 (811 in Scotland), with step-parent and relative adoptions compris-
must hold a review within a month, and thereafter at intervals not excee ing roughly half the total. However, these figures are less than half the total
ing three months, to (a) establish that the criteria for placing the child for 1977: a fact which might be explained by improved contraceptive tech-
secure accommodation still apply, and (b) determine whether an alternative niques, ~olicieswhich encourage single mothers to keep their babies, and
form of accommodation would be appropriate. an emphasis on maintaining links with biological families.
The child must be legally represented in all secure-accommodation pr
ceedings, unless he or she has refused such representation. A guardian a The evolution of adoption in the United Kingdom
lite~lzmust be appointed in non-criminal proceedings to keep a child i- -
secure accommodation, except where the court considers that this is According to Triseliotis (1997), there have been three distinct periods in
necessary in the interests of the child (Ball, 1996). the evolution of adoption in the United IGngdom since the introduction of
The report of the National Commission of Inquiry into the Preventio adoption legislation a little over seventy years ago. The first period occurred
Child Abuse (1996, p. 20) reports that children placed in secure units in the 1920s and 1930s, between the two world wars, when adoption was
be at 'increased risk of bullying and violence'. It further notes the lac mainly practised by working-class people who were relatively unconcerned
'comprehensive annual statistics on what behaviour has caused children t about heredity and inheritance. Adoption concentrated on older children,
be placed in secure accommodation' and cites recent research indicating rather than infants, and sometimes included children with disabilities.
that a third of children placed in secure accommodation are 'locked u Triseliotis argues that, except for the post-1970s, this period was the clos-
unnecessarily'. The report also makes reference to other research whic est that adoption policy and practice have come to their modern purpose of
showed that over 90 per cent of those sentenced to long-term detention ha 'providing a home for a child' (Triselifkis, 1997).
suffered abuse andlor loss as children. Unfortunately, 'most had not receive The second period, after the second World War, ran from the early
effective help to enable them to come to terms with their experiences'. 1950s to the early 1970s. For various reasons, adoption became popular
among the middle classes, and was seen as a way of offering children to
childless couples and as a solution to the problem of out-of-wedlock births.
Adoption Thus, adoption during this period focused less on 'providing a home for a
child' than on 'providing a child for a home'. Bowlby's research on the
The adoption of children dates back to antiquity. References to ado adverse effects of separation and institutionalisation on children had a
can be found in the Bible and in the legal codes of the Chinese, Hi strong influence on adoption policy and practice. His claim that children
Babylonians, Romans and E,wtians. Its purpose has varied considerably over two years of age should not be adopted appeared to support the view
country and era: for example, to cement relationships with foreign powe that la cement of children with disabilities or 'dubious' social backgrounds
to make possible the co~ltinuanceof religious traditions; to overcome di should be avoided (Triseliotis, 1997). The inescapable inference here is
culties in recognising an out-of-wedlock child; and, more recently, to pro at, if a child is to be provided for a home, it should be a child worthy of
vide permanent homes for children in need of them. honour, not a child who has been damaged in some way by unfortunate
Modern adoption has it roots in the Victorian foster-care system wher us experiences.
babies, often illegitimate, whose mothers could not care for them wer e third ~ e r i o din the evolution of adoption began towards the end of
found homes with other families. However, adoption legislation was 1960s. Between 1969 and the beginning of the 1990s the number of
passed until as late as 1926 in England and 1930 in Scotland. The del nts and very young children adopted by non-relatives fell from around
developing a legal framework around a common practice ~artlyresu ,000 to about 4,500. For example, the 1993 figure (6,859 children
from attitudes concerning the possible inheritance by adopted children 0 opted in England and Wales) is less than half of the figure for 1977. This
'bad blood' and crilninal tendencies from their biological parent 1 in the number of children adopted reflected factors such as the wider
(Triseliotis, 1997).Not only might 'the apple not fall far from the tree', bu ailability of contraception, increased access to abortion services, and a
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
meant that more single mothers kept their children. Ruxton (1996, p. 347)
reports:
Statistics from several northern European countries from the e
World War I1 onwards...show how the fall in the number of ba
available for adoption went hand in hand with improvements in the
dard of living and, in particular, with improved welfare provision to
gle parent families. ...Experience in today's Europe shows a progre
and sustained decline in the number of healthy babies offered for
tion in each country.
Consequently, adoption agencies in Britain turned their attention to th
placement of children with 'special needs'; that is, older children with emo-
tional and behavioural problems or with mental and physical disabilities
(Triseliotis, 1997).
This shift in perspective back to 'a home for a child' drew on research
suggesting two things: first, that there were large numbers of children i
care who required new permanent homes since they had little chance
being reunited with their birth parents; and, secondly, that with an
enabling family environment, older children could overcome earlier psycho-
logical adversities and do well. At the same time, the idea of psychological
or social parenthood was becoming accepted: proponents of social parent-
hood argue that effective parenting depends not on a biological connection
with the child but on positive psychological and social interactions day by
day. All these factors encouraged people to adopt. It might also be noted
that transferring children from the care system to adoptive homes was
financially attractive to local authorities, 'who otherwise would have faced
many years of funding residential or foster care placements' (Triseliotis,
1997, p. 334).
The outcome of the drive to place children with special needs in adop-
tive homes appears to be mixed. On the plus side, thousands of children
have gained permanent families. New knowledge and skills have been
developed with regard to the preparation, matching and post-placement
support of adoptive families and children. On the debit side, however, this
new knowledge has not been applied by all agencies. Further, some adop-
tive families have been unable to cope with the level of emotional and
behavioural problems manifested by the children adopted. As a result,
some children have experienced yet more disruption and unhappiness
(Triseliotis, 1997).
Research indicates that the stability of adoptive placements can be as
high as 85-90 per cent, especially for children placed with their adoptive
families before the age of nine. However, the breakdown rates for older
Looking after children 205
children are sometimes as high as 50 per cent, and there is a close associa-
tion between increasing age and higher breakdown rates. Because it is felt
that many older children who might require adoptive families are more psy-
chologically damaged than was previously the case, agencies are now more
cautious about their placement. They are tending to place such youngsters
with permanent foster carers, or with foster carers with a view to adoption
later on if things work out (Triseliotis, 1997).
An essential condition for the adoption of any child is the consent of the
biological parents or a legal termination of parental rights so that the child
is free for adoption. Termination of rights may occur either by the consent
of the biological parents or involuntarily, following a finding that they have
failed to exercise their parental responsibility. A number of areas of uncer-
tainty exist regarding parental consent which may call into question
whether a particular child is in fact free for adoption. For example, if the
birth mother consents but the birth father does not, should the birth
father's rights prevail even if he has had no contact with the child at all?
Once consent has been given, should it be irrevocable and, if not, how long
should the birth parents be given to change their minds before the adoption
becomes final? Further, since consent must be given by children of a cer-
tain age to their own adoption, should the child's wishes override those of
the parents if there is a differencefof opinion? Another area of uncertainty
in modern times concerns which of the parents has the right to consent to
or block the child's adoption when the child has been created through arti-
ficial insemination or surrogate parenting.
An adoption is not made final until the child has lived in the adoptive
home under the guidance of a social-welfare agency for a certain period of
time, usually a year. Waiver provisions give flexibility so that courts can
shorten the time if doing so is in the best interests of the child. Once the
adoption is finalised, it is 'for keeps' and cannot be abrogated because the
birth parents wish to withdraw their consent or the adoptive parents decide
they do not want the child. Adoptive parents may lose their children in
exactly the same ways as biological parents: they may relinquish their right
to the child or the child may be removed if allegations of neglect or abuse
are upheld. With the increase of adoption of children with special needs,
more adoptions are dissolving, causing some people to advocate more
humane ways to undo these placements legally so that children can move
on to more appropriate placements without feelings of failure.
Open adoption
Triseliotis (1997, p. 335) argues that mistakes were made in the past when
placing children with special needs, including the revivalist approach with
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
206 An introduction to working with children
which the policy was pursued, the introduction of time limits, the use o
the law to assume parental rights and thus stop parental access before pla
ing the children with new families, and the severance of important em
tional links between older children and their birth families.
Two of the 'mistakes' identified by Triseliotis (1997) included lac
parental input before the child was placed with an adoptive family, and se
erance of ties with the child afterwards. The notion that confidential
is preferable for all three members of the adoptive triad - birth paren
adoptive parents and children - is termed closed or confidential adoptio
It rests on the 'fresh start' principle whereby it is deemed better for t
child to start again with a fresh family and without the emotional 'baggage
that continued contact with the family of origin might compel the child to
carry. However, in recent years, this closed model is increasingly giving way
to an open or cooperative adoption model. As fewer infants have become
available for adoption, birth mothers have found more leverage in the
process of relinquishment and preferences about adoptive parents. Agencies
have learned that mothers are less concerned about confidentiality than
with helping to select the adoptive parents and with maintaining some kind
of connection with the child after the adoption. Adults who were adopted
as infants, for their part, have begun assertively to seek to have their sealed
records opened and have demanded the right to know about their biological
origins.
The moveinent to place for adoption children with special needs (those
children hitherto considered 'unadoptable') has also changed adoption
practice dramatically. These children are often older, have memories of
their birth parents and siblings, and have ideas of their own about inain-
taining ties. Adoptive parents of such children have often thoughtfully con-
sidered their motives in seelung adoption before approaching the agency:
they lmow what h n d of child they might be able to help and they want full
information about potential adoptees, sometimes including a meeting with
the birth family. Since it is difficult to recruit parents who are willing to
face the difficulties inherent in adopting a special-needs child, agencies'
attitudes towards such parents focus less on 'screening out' (the common
attitude towards people who want to adopt infants) than on helping parents
in every possible way to achieve satisfaction in their adoptive parenthood.
Many adoption agencies today have revised traditional 'closed' practices
towards varying degrees of openness. These changes may include planned
cominunication between the adoptive and birth parents prior to the place-
ment. In the case of a baby, all the parents may have face-to-face meetings
before the birth, at the time of the agreement for placement and at various
times after the birth. At such meetings, the birth mother and the adop-
ting parents may share first names, photographs, addresses and telephone
Looking after children 207
numbers. The information exchanged may include ethnic and religious
backgrounds, level of education, aspects of personality and interests, physi-
cal and medical characteristics, and other matters of coinmon interest.
These options are agreed when birth and adoptive parents, with the help of
an agency social worker, discuss the extent of 'openness' in the present and
future. Such arrangements are usually entirely voluntary on the part of both
parents and adopters, as courts would be very reluctant to attach contact
requirements as part of an adoption order.
Inter-country adoption
By contrast with their counterparts in northern and western European
countries, British adoption agencies and practitioners took a stance against
inter-country (and transracial) adoption, preferring to concentrate their
efforts on the placement of own-countly special-needs children (Triseliotis,
1997). Until 1990 only about 50 adoption orders a year in England and
Wales concerned children from other countries, and many of those chil-
dren were related to the adopting parents. However, the number has
increased since 1992. This owes much to increased public awareness of
the appalling conditions suffered by children in residential institutions in
Romania and other eastern European countries. There is ongoing interest
in adopting from Central and South America, India, South-East Asia, and
China (Ruxton, 1996).
However, some argue that inter-country adoption, which is driven by the
demand of childless couples in the West, has created an unregulated mar-
ket involving the one-way movement of children from poor to rich coun-
tries. Proponents of this view say that much more should be done to
provide support for such children in their own countries. Some cases entail
'child trafficking', with babies smuggled illegally and large profits made by
'go-betweens'. It is further held that these adoptions occur at the expense
of domestic placements for older children and those with disabilities.
Evidence is also cited of high placement breakdowns, resulting in admis-
sion to the public care system (Ruxton, 1996).
Conversely, others insist that inter-country adoption is successful in that
children are saved froin poverty, institutionalisation, and a life on the
streets; they experience loving family life and significantly improved life
chances. It is pointed out that many of the children concerned are rejected
in the country of their birth, and that inter-country adoption is encouraged
by the governments of many so-called 'donor' countries. I11 addition, child
trafficking and badly prepared placements are consequences of lack of
regulation, which can be rectified through cooperation between countries
(Ruxton, 1996).
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
Lookingafter children 209
possible in all EU member states, a recent review of adoption law in the
Convention on Intercountry Adoption (29 May 1993), which prescr UK pointed to highly successful adoptions by single people, with particular
reference to those involving older children and those with disabilities. It is
d children often experience difficulty coping with one
protect hislher fundamental rights. Birth parents or others resp ose relationship at a time, let alone the several relationships involved in
for consenting to adoptions should understand what they are con ining a family with a mother, father and perhaps other children. The sin-
parent is able to focus exclusively on the child because there are no
not be offered financial or other inducements. Agencies acting in inte ompeting demands from a spouse, and thus, may provide a more appropri-
ate placement than a couple could. Studies show that single adoptive par-
should derive improper financial gain from adoption. Finally, adopt ents are more likely to be women who have occupations and slulls that lend
ents should be carefully and objectively assessed for their su themselves to understanding children's special issues. For example, nurses,
(Ruxton, 1996,p. 352). cia1 workers and teachers are highly represented among single adoptive
The Convention will establish a framework whereby the sending country ally have extended family back-up and a high percent-
is responsible for the assessment of the child's circumstances, needs and s brought up in single-parent homes (Feigelman and
interests, and for transmitting to the receiving country the information that
shows this has been done. Receiving countries are responsible for arranging
the assessment of the adoptive parents and transmitting the results to the
doptionby gays and lesbians
accord with the Articles of the Convention, are known as 'Conventi If adoption by single people is controversial, adoption by homosexuals is far
Adoptions' (Ruxton, 1996). The Draft Adoption Bill, published by t more so. Although it has been argued that lesbian households may be safer
British government in March 1996, contains provisions that would enable for a child than heterosexual ~nes~becauseno men are present, public
the United Kingdom to ratify the Hague Convention on Intercountry opinion in the EU - as measured bya survey in 1993 - seems to be against
Adoption. such placements. To be sure, the great majority of people in countries like
Denmark, the Netherlands and Spain do believe that gay and lesbian peo-
Same-race placements ple should enjoy equal rights to those of heterosexual couples in relation to
marriage and inheritance. However, only in the Netherlands did the pro-
Within the EU, few children from ethnic minority groups are placed in portion in favour of homosexuals having the right to adopt children (47 per
adoptive families of the same ethnic origin, despite the fact that in some cent) exceed the proportion against (40 per cent) (Ruxton, 1996).
countries such children comprise a majority of those entering care and
requiring adoption. Agencies in the UK appear to have done more than
their counterparts in other EU countries to place a child within his or her Adoption by foster parents
own culture. However, even here progress has been slow. The reason usu- Foster carers are another relatively recent group of adoptive applicants.
ally given for not lacing ethnic minority children with same-race adoptive Although there have always been some foster carers who have adopted
parents is that insufficient numbers of ethnic minority families come for- their foster children, the practice has not been encouraged. In the 1960s
ward to adopt (James, 1986). However, Ruxton (1996) argues that this is and 1970s, adoption by foster carers was termed 'the back door to adop-
partly because inadequate emphasis is given by many agencies to proactive tion', a route whereby carers could 'try on' children until they found the one
recruitment of such families (see also, Gambe et al., 1992). they wanted to adopt. Social workers tended to feel in general that this was-
harmful to children since the carers' prime purpose was not to do the best
Adoption by single people for the child in the context of a temporary placement but to evaluate the
child as a candidate for adoption. It was felt that people who wanted to
Another issue which has attracted much debate in recent years is whether adopt should apply for adoption, people who wanted to foster should apply
single people should be allowed to adopt. Whilst such adoptions are not to foster, and there should be no overlap between the two, particularly
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
210 An introduction to working with children
since children whom their foster carers wished to adopt might not be free
for adoption. This attitude has recently been seen as unrealistic since foster
carers grow fond of their charges, the affection may be reciprocated and, in
cases where the child is free to be adopted, the continuance of an estab-
lished and positive relationship may be the best option for the child.
Difficulties may arise with respect to changed relationships with the child's
natural family: permanent adoption is a very different proposition from
temporary fostering. However, the recent trend towards open adoption may
go some way to alleviate these difficulties, as may supportive pre- and post-
placement work by the adoption agency.
Inter-country adoptions, same-race placements, and the placement of
children with homosexual, single, or foster-care adopters are all issues
which seem likely to represent an ongoing challenge for adoption agencies
and professionals. Triseliotis (1997) considers that other challenges include:
recruiting new families for some 'very "damaged and problematic' young-
sters against a background of increasing numbers of reconstituted families
which are themselves having to care for children from more than one rela-
tionship; developing more uniform and better informed preparatory and
matching methods; improving training of adoptive (and foster) parents in
relation to managing problematic behaviours; organising more uniform
post-placement services; and developing slulls to manage open adoptions.
Looking after children 211
Besides local authorities, a number of other adoption agencies are approved
by the Secretary of State for Health (Ruxton, 1996,p. 362).
Because the making of an adoption order has such a profound impact on
the child's legal status, strict requirements are laid down for all stages of
the adoption process. An adoption order can only be made by an authorised
court; that is, the magistrates' family proceedings court, the County Court
or, in certain circumstances, the High Court. The statutory provisions and
procedural rules are contained in the Adoption Act 1976, the Adoption
Rules 1984, the Adoption Agencies Regulations 1983, and the Adoption
(Amendment) Rules 1991 (Ball, 1996).
As previously mentioned, applications by single people are allowed, but
there is a strong presumption in favour of married couples. Moreover,
unmarried couples are not permitted to apply jointly. The birth parents'
agreemenl to the adoption is necessary. However, if this cannot be obt-
ained, either because their whereabouts are unknown or because they will
not agree to adoption, an application may be made for the court to dispense
with the parents' agreement. Usually, the grounds for such a course are
that the parents are withholding consent 'unreasonably' - for example,
because there is no reasonable prospect of them being able to resume care
of the child (Ruxton, 1996).
Before the court considers the application, a comprehensive report must
be compiled which provides detailed information about the child, the birth
parents, prospective adoptive parents, and the role and involvement of the
The legalframework agency concerned. The court may appoint a 'guardian ad litenz' to represent
Now that we have considered some of the practice issues related to adop- the child's interests.
tion, it is time to consider the legal framework. Local authority social work- The welfare of the child is the first consideration of the court. Section 6
ers may be involved in adoption in three ways: first, because adoption is of the Adoption Act 1976 requires that:
being considered for children on their caseload; secondly, because they
may have to prepare the detailed report required by the court in an adop- the court or adoption agency shall have regard to all the circumstances,
tion case under Schedule 2 of the Adoption Rules 1984; and thirdly, the first consideration being given to the need to safeguard and pro-
because the Adoption Act 1976 places on all local authorities a statutory mote the welfare of the child throughout his childhood; and shall so far
duty to: as is practicable ascertain the wishes and feelings of the child regarding
the decision and give due consideration to them, having regard to his age
establish and maintain within their area a service designed to meet the and understanding.
needs in relation to adoption of:
It may be that the child's welfare can be safeguarded by a less drastic
(a) children who have been or rnay be adopted, change in his or her legal status than that effected by adoption. Under the
(b) parents and guardians of such children, and Children Act 1989, the court may make orders other than those applied for -
(c) persons who have adopted or may adopt a child, and for that purpose such as a residence order instead of an adoption order. Residence orders
to provide the requisite facilities, or secure that they are ~rovidedby may be made by courts hearing adoption applications irrespective of
approved adoption societies. whether or not the parents have agreed to adoption. In addition to determin-
(Ball, 1996, p. 98) ing who the child lives with, the residence order gives the person in whose
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
Looking after children 213
favour the order is made parental responsibility for the duration of the ord
The court can also add any conditions it considers necessary to the order
contrast with adoption, residence orders generally cease to have effect w
the child is 16, but may not do so if the court considers the case exce
tional; the child's name can only be changed with the consent of all tho
with parental responsibility, or on the direction of the court; moreover, th
with a residence order cannot appoint a guardian for the child in the ev
of their death, or indeed, consent to the child's adoption (Ball, 1996).
Where either the child is already in the care of the agency and the q
tion of parental consent is in doubt, or the mother wishes the child to
adopted before any specific application is ready, the agency may apply t
the court for an order freeing the child for adoption. The parents must con-
sent to the order, or their consent must be dispensed with. Such an order
removes existing parental responsibility and vests it in the agency, which
will hold it until an adoption order is made. Unless they have signed a dec-
laration that they do not wish to be further involved, after a year the birth
parents will be informed if an adoption order has been made, or the child
has been placed for adoption. If they have not signed the declaration and
the child has not been placed, the birth parents may apply for revocation of
the freeing order. Applications for freeing orders have been subject to long
delays; further, once freed, the children concerned are, in effect, placed in
a legal limbo until adopted (Ball, 1996).
The publication in March 1996 of the Department of Health and Welsh
Office's paper Adoption - A Service for Childre~z,with a Draft Adoptio
Bill for consultation, represented the culmination of a lengthy review o
adoption law. The Draft Bill seeks to bring adoption legislation in line wit
the Children Act 1989, in particular by providing that the child's welfar
must be the court's and the adoption agency's paramount consideration. It
would also replace the process of 'freeing for adoption' by an entirely new
framework for placement for adoption, with or without parental agreement,
. and involving the court before placement in cases of dispute. In addition,
the Draft Bill would make it possible for step-parents to obtain parental
responsibility without malung an adoption application, and includes provi-
sions which would allow the United Kingdom to ratify the Hague
Convention on Intercountry Adoption - discussed earlier in the chapter
(Collier, 1996). This Draft Bill has so far not been taken forward by the
Labour government.
In this chapter, we have discussed the placement options available to chil-
dren who are being looked after. We will go on now to look at anti-
discriminatory and anti-oppressive practice, in the next chapter.
Case example
Case example 6.1 John
John (aged 12 years, 5 months)
John comes from a family of five children. He has an older brother (14) and
an older sister (13), and two younger sisters (10 and 9). He is the only child
in the family who is of mixed parentage. The three oldest children have had
a number of care episodes, in all three cases beginning when they were
twelve years old. The older brother and sister no longer live at home, but
live with different relatives in the rather large extended family surrounding
John. His mother comes from a family of eight children. There are lots of
aunts, uncles and cousins in the family.
John's parents (Mike and Mary) are married to each other, but the rela-
tionship has been very turbulent. Mike frequently comes home drunk on
payday, and gives the remainder of his salary to Mary, which is usually
insufficient for the family to buy food, clothing and other necessities.
When Mary confronts him about this, he becomes violent and on two occa-
sions has caused her to have broken limbs. She has been in the local refuge-
on two occasions, but after each she has gone back after about six weeks
away. c
Another source of tension in thi'relationship is that Mike suspects that
Mary is having relationships with other men. He had no suspicions about
this until John was born. John, who was conspicuously not Mike's son, is
aware that he is not Mike's child, but has no knowledge of who his biologi-
cal father might be. He has never discussed this with his mother, nor has
she broached the issue with him.
John's difficulties appeared to begin after a very turbulent first year in
secondary school. He has always had racial taunts from children at school,
but when he went to secondary school, it seemed to become much worse.
He was assaulted on his way home from school in his second week, by a
group of about five or six older children at the school. Since then, he has- -
been very reluctant to go to school, but inanaged to attend with cajoling
and persuading. In his second year this has been much more difficult, and
he has only attended school about 40 per cent of the time.
Since the beginning of the second school year, John's behaviour at home
has become much more difficult as well. There are frequent rows with his
mother. When things calm down, he is unable to explain to his mother why
he is so angry with her. She is finding it very difficult. Finally, she
approached the social services saying that she was not able to have him at
home anymore.
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely
214 An introductionto working:with children
Although reluctant to provide accommodation for John at first, the social
worker agreed to try a plan of respite, in view of the very severe difficulties
at home. John was admitted to the local children's home for the first time
for a two-week period, a week last Friday. The plan is to use the experience
to work out how to improve the relationship between John and his mother.
The social worker, however, is concerned that given the experience of the
older children in the family, John's respite arrangement might drift into
something more permanent. From the social services' perspective, this is
something to avoid.
Questions
I. We know that children of mixed heritage are placed away from home in
disproportionate numbers. What effect might John's mixed heritage
have on the social worker's thinlung?
2. A continuing controversy centres around whether the focus on family
preservation is threatening the safety of children and should be discon-
tinued. Bearing this controversy in mind, do you think that the social
worker's initial reluctance to provide accommodation for John was justi-
fied under the circumstances?
3. If John's respite arrangement does become more permanent, this might
be something to avoid from the perspective of social services. Is it some-
thing to avoid from the perspectives of John and his family? Why, or
why not?
I. If John is placed away from home, what kind of placement might be
most appropriate for him? Keep in mind the restrictiveness continuum
and all you have learned about the advantages and disadvantages of dif-
ferent types of placement for different types of children.
5. Preserving the attachment to parents, siblings and other kin is an impor-
tant goal of contemporary child-welfare practice. Do you agree that this
should be an important goal? Why, or why not? What steps might be
taken to preserve John's attachment to his family if he were to be placed
away from home? What would be the probable result if these steps were
not taken?
Určeno pouze pro studijní účely