Parent and Allied Service Professional Perspectives of Family Engagement in the Child Welfare System

Background: Family engagement includes involving families in the helping process, participation in some level of service provision by families and professionals, as well as a strengths-based approach to including families in the different interactions or decision-making encountered in the child welfare system. Importantly, engagement requires more than compliance. Family engagement is broadly considered as interpersonal and interactive processes between child welfare system or allied service professionals and parents to work toward the necessary goals for case planning, case closure, reunification, or service completion. This research examined parents’ and professionals’ perceptions and experiences of family engagement, barriers and facilitators to family engagement, and recommendations for enhancing family engagement within the child welfare system.

Methods: This qualitative study included focus groups with 10 parents impacted by the child welfare system and 15 child welfare or allied service professionals (n=25). Participants were recruited by a parent advocacy organization. Data were analyzed using both inductive and deductive thematic coding in order to address the a priori purposes of this report, as well as allow novel findings to emerge (Braun & Clarke, 2006). There were two independent coders for the parent transcripts and one independent coder for the worker transcripts; however, the entire research team reviewed and provided feedback on the themes .

Results: Themes and quotes, as well as parent- and research-supported recommendations will be discussed in more detail during the presentation. For parents, family engagement (1a) bolsters parent and family autonomy; (1b) involves strengths-focused support or positive regard; and (1c) is humanizing. Conversely, a lack of family engagement is reflected in(2a) parents feeling unimportant; (2b) experiencing labels and stigma; (2c) parents feeling that power is used against them; (2d) parents feeling mistreated; and (2e) parent perception of negative immediate and lasting impacts of system interaction. For professionals, family engagement (1a) values parents’ experience and voice; (1b) is reflective and skilled; (1c) is honest; and (1d) supportive. Conversely, a lack of family engagement is reflected in (2a) compliance-driven more than relationship-focused culture; (2b) punitive or harmful experiences by parents and system professionals in the child welfare system; (2c) systemic-level barriers to family engagement; and (2d) negative impact of the system on professionals.

Conclusions/Implications: There was some similarity among participants’ themes across the two sample groups. Both groups identified that family engagement should include supporting and valuing the autonomy and needs of parents while recognizing parents’ vulnerability within the context of the child welfare system. Conversely, professionals were a little more system-focused or more readily identified systemic barriers to engagement with families than interaction-based or relational barriers. Recommendations from participants to bolster family engagement included humanizing parents, practicing from a strengths-based lens, prioritizing trust and communication, providing concrete support to parents, offering support after the case is closed, tailoring case planning to the needs and requests of parents, and reminding professionals that they hold real power over parents.