WITHDRAWN: Interventions to Support Reunification for Families Involved in Child Welfare Systems: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background and Purpose: For the 400,000 children who enter foster care each year, the majority will eventually exit care to reunify with their biological families. In fact, in policy and practice, reunification is the priority case goal for children and families involved in child welfare systems. However, research suggests that up to one-third of children that reunify re-enter care because of continued neglect or abuse. Therefore, continued interventions and supports are necessary to support children and families as they transition post-reunification.

Methods: The objective of this study was to examine interventions that have been effective in increasing reunification rates and rates of successful reunification, or reunification with no re-entry into care. A systematic review was conducted to create a comprehensive list of interventions that had been conducted with families to increase reunification from foster care and synthesize the findings of these articles. Using the PRISMA checklist, specific search terms, databases, and inclusion and exclusion criteria were identified prior to the retrieval of articles. All retrieved screened, and those that met inclusion criteria were coded to synthesize key findings.  

Results: A total of 268 articles were initially retrieved and screened, of which 21 met inclusion criteria and were fully coded. These articles were divided into three categories: Interventions that focused on the parent subsystem (n=1); those that focused on the family system (n=19); and those that focused on agencies (n=1). Notably, none of the interventions focused exclusively on successful reunification. Of the 21 articles that focused on increasing reunification rates, few examined the same intervention. One intervention that was tested in multiple articles was Family Drug Courts (FDC); families who participated in FDC reunified at consistently higher rates than those that went through the traditional court system. Other interventions such as Intensive Reunification Services increased reunification rates, but results were inconclusive regarding their impact on successful reunification. Interventions that only addressed one presenting problem—such as parenting skills or drug addiction—were largely ineffective in increasing reunification rates.  

Conclusion and Implications:  Overall, interventions that addressed multiple problems were the most effective at increasing reunification rates. This is consistent with prior literature that calls for comprehensive support for families involved in child welfare systems who have multiple, complex problems. Furthermore, interventions should address the root causes of the child’s removal to best meet families’ needs. For example, prior to participating in a psycho-educational parenting class, parents with substance use or mental health issues require stabilization. Given the lack of studies on interventions to reduce re-entry, more research and interventions are needed to support families as they reunify and readapt. Finally, practitioners and agencies should re-conceptualize reunification to understand it as an ongoing process, so that families can partake in extended programs and supports as needed.