![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
It is assumed that youth who achieve legal permanency (LP) have the adequate supports and resources needed to transition to adulthood. However, these relationships' long-term outcomes and stability are seldom evaluated, especially after youth transition to adulthood. Furthermore, evidence suggests that achieving LP, particularly in adolescence, does not always ensure enduring relationships and support from adoptive parents or legal guardians. There is a growing recognition that focusing solely on legal and administrative outcomes, especially to reduce youth aging out, may inadvertently increase placement instability and decrease well-being, especially among older foster youth. Therefore, we aimed to address these gaps by exploring the lived experiences of formal (legal) and informal (relational) disruptions among young adults who exited foster care through LP.
Methods:
Adult participants were eligible if they exited foster care through LP and reported a legal or relational permanency disruption before or after turning 18. We distributed electronic flyers to online foster care alumni and advocacy groups. Eligibility was screened via a Qualtrics survey, and eligible participants were invited to a 60–90-minute semi-structured interview via Zoom. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Open coding was conducted for each transcript followed by line-by-line coding. At least two researchers coded each transcript, and disagreements were resolved through a third investigator. Participant quotes that best captured a particular theme or subtheme were included through consensus.
The authors bring rather unique perspectives to this study; three authors endorsed lived experience as foster care alumni and one as a foster/adoptive parent. There is growing interest in researchers’ lived experiences and their subsequent impacts on research. While acknowledging potential limitations, we contend that individuals with lived experience can offer unique and innovative perspectives to address pressing concerns within child welfare. We chose IPA given our varied connections to this topic. Unlike other methods, IPA recognizes and even emphasizes researchers’ subjective interpretation of the data. Reflexivity and memo writing were utilized throughout to reduce possible bias.
Results
Eleven individuals met the inclusion criteria, with five completing the semi-structured interview (one Native American participant and four White participants). Four superordinate themes were identified including 1) the timeline and process of disruption, 2) participant perspectives about why disruptions occurred 3) participant responses to the disruption, and 4) factors related to participants’ decisions to maintain or end relationships with caregivers. Multiple subordinate themes comprised each overarching theme.
Conclusions and Implications
We identified unique and shared participant experiences, which suggest future research exploring disrupted permanency is needed to ensure youth exiting foster care are adequately supported. Although the specific perspectives of this small and relatively homogenous group are not intended to broadly generalize, they highlight instances where legal or policy-oriented outcomes were disconnected from youths’ experiences of well-being. This may suggest that exclusively adhering to legal/policy definitions of permanency may not always provide accurate representations of long-term outcomes and support needs of transition-aged youth.