Is all contact between children in care and their

birth parents ‘good’ contact?

Stephanie Taplin PhDNSW Centre for Parenting & Research

2006 ACWA Conference15 August 2006

History of contact in foster History of contact in foster carecare

Recent history of contact in OOHC Developed out of open adoption

literatureInfluences of family laws. 86 Children and Young Persons (Care

and Protection) Act 1998 commenced in 2000

Impacts of new legislation Impacts of new legislation

Increased time and resources on contact arrangements

Children may be having more contact than previously

In NSW around 4,000 children enter care p.a. and over 10,000 are in care

Debates between legal and welfare Debates between legal and welfare professionsprofessions

Decisions and interpretations affected by:personal and family experiences,socio-cultural backgrounds, their role and responsibilities, agency task, professional training and experience,perceived power and authority.

Harris & Lindsay 2002

How good is the evidence for How good is the evidence for contact in OOHC? contact in OOHC?

Much of the evidence comes from family law and adoption literature

Much of the research on foster care has methodological flaws e.g. small, unrepresentative samples

Few sound, large-scale studies on effects of contact in long-term care

For contact to be beneficial, per For contact to be beneficial, per se, a causal relationship needs to se, a causal relationship needs to

be proven: be proven: that increased contact that increased contact leads toleads to

improved outcomes, not just that improved outcomes, not just that contact is contact is associated or associated or correlated withcorrelated with improved improved

outcomes.outcomes.

Benefits of contactBenefits of contactPrevents idealisation of the birth

parents; opportunities to discuss why cannot live together

Maintains cultural identity, originsThose visited more often are better

adjusted psychologically – but is it the contact?

Some evidence that contact increases stability in adoption – but applicable to foster care?

Other benefits….. Other benefits….. Contact encourages reunification?Contact encourages reunification?

Children who have greater amounts of contact are more likely to return home

But no evidence that the contact visits alone explain this

Confounding variables may explain, such as child-birth parent relationship, a lack of child behavioural problems, or promotion of contact by the worker.

Contact encourages/maintains Contact encourages/maintains attachment to birth parents?attachment to birth parents?

‘Research on the attachment behaviour of children in foster care is limited and needs to be bolstered to provide a clearer understanding of how maltreatment, separation from parents, and placement in foster care influence attachment, and how foster children’s attachments affect their long-term adjustment.’

Mennen & O’Keefe 2005

Reasons for no/restricted Reasons for no/restricted contact: threat of harm/abusecontact: threat of harm/abuse

Where strong evidence that child had been abused prior to placement, prohibitions on contact found to be associated with better outcomes

Previously abused children with no restrictions were more likely to be re-abused either during contact or after return home

Sinclair, Gibbs & Wilson 2004; Sinclair et al 2004

Other reasons why contact not Other reasons why contact not beneficial: disruptions beneficial: disruptions

Violence and drunkenness/ intoxication by birth parents

Serious mental health issuesCommon problems: unreliability of

parents, rejection by parents, parents trying to undermine the carer or setting the child against the carers

Farmer et al 2004; Sinclair, Gibbs & Wilson 2004; Sinclair et al 2004 & 2005

Additional effects on Additional effects on the childthe child

The impact on children of being rejected by their parents undermines the child’s sense that their new family can keep them safe and secure; the child’s emotional distress from contact may have a knock-on effect of undermining the new parents’ psychological equilibrium.

Neil & Howe 2004

Foster carers’ viewsFoster carers’ views

Many dissatisfied with contact arrangements

Behaviour problems after contact visits

Increased strain from contact visits

Conclusions re contact in Conclusions re contact in long-term carelong-term care

No conclusive evidence that contact, in itself, promotes reunification or attachment

Not enough is known about the effects of contact to be able to generalise about its long-term impacts

Arguments often been driven by ideology not science

‘Do no harm’

Implications for practiceImplications for practiceRecommendations must be case-

specificGood-quality assessments are

neededPrinciple: that contact facilitates

child’s developmental needs, promotes stability and security

Most issues to consider are inter-related and dynamic

Is the goal restoration?Is the goal restoration?

When the goal of intervention is returning the child to the birth parents, then frequent visits should be encouraged (Mennen & O’Keefe 2005; Leathers 2003)

Assessments of parenting capacity, risks

Early decisions about restoration

Other issues to considerOther issues to consider

• How strong is the attachment/ relationship between children and their birth parents?

• Are there risks to the safety of the child?

• Are children’s wishes for and reactions to contact being taken into account?

What else?What else?Age and developmental stage of childHow supportive are foster carers?Any changes in relationships and

situations?Significant travelling and disruptionReaction of birth parentsContact with other family membersIndirect contact may be sufficient

ConclusionsConclusions

Decisions about contact should be made on a case-by-case basis and reflect the unique characteristics of the child and their overall circumstances.

Full report available at

www.community.nsw.gov.au/documents/research_good_contact.pdf

DoCS’ Research site

www.community.nsw.gov.au/html/news_

publications/research.htm