Allegation System | Rule and Procedure | Decision Trees | Federal and State Law | Clinical Skills and Research | Table of Contents
7.10.1 Reasonable Efforts | 7.10.2 Reasonable Progress | 7.10.3 Lack of Reasonable Progess | 7.10.4 Parental Ambivalence | 7.10.5 Approaches to Working with Ambivalent Parents
Reasonable progress and the family's readiness for reunification are continually assessed. The decision regarding when a family is ready to be reunified should be discussed in the supervisory conference and with the Child and Family Team during the family meetings. The focus of these discussions are twofold: (1) whether the parents have made reasonable progress in correcting the conditions which led to the removal of their children from the home; and (2) whether the parents have eliminated or reduced the contributing factors which precipitated the removal, such as mental illness, a developmental disability, domestic violence, or substance abuse. If it is determined that the parents have failed to make reasonable progress to correct the conditions which led to the removal of their children, the alternative permanency goal must be considered. The alternative permanency plan will be discussed at a family meeting so that all involved parties are aware of the decision not to reunify and the reasons why.
The caseworker has a corresponding responsibility to make reasonable efforts to reunify the family. This means the caseworker must ensure the family is provided timely, appropriate services to facilitate changes necessary for reunification.
In assessing the reasonableness of efforts, the caseworker must consider:
· The relevance of the services provided or offered
- Does the service address the reasons that the case came into the system?
- Are the services connected to the comprehensive assessment?
- Are services being offered that do not need to be completed prior to the child's return home?
· The adequacy of such services:
- Does the service include interventions necessary to address the primary presenting problem?
- With sufficient effort and motivation, can the family be expected to resolve the problem?
- Does a qualified person or agency provide the service?
· The coordination of the services:
- If multiple services are needed, are they provided in a logical sequence that contributes to their successful completion?
- Is the caseworker in contact with the various service providers as well as the family?
- Does the caseworker understand a family's progress or lack of progress?
· The accessibility of services:
- Can the family be provided the service in a timely fashion?
- If there is a waiting list, has the worker explored any alternatives?
- Does the caseworker understand what services are and are not available in the community?
- If services are not available, has the worker arranged other activities or interventions to maintain the family until the services are available?
- Have barriers to services, such as transportation or childcare, been addressed adequately?
· The diligence of agency effort:
- Has the caseworker or service provider made good faith, ongoing efforts to keep the family engaged? Outreach efforts include visits to the parent's home or work place (if appropriate), telephone calls, letters (both regular and certified) and similar efforts to engage parents in the service plan.
- If the family is resistive or absent, has the caseworker or service provider reached out to re-involve the family in services?
- Have diligent searches been done every six months in accordance with Rule and Procedure to locate absent or non-custodial parents?
- Have adequate outreach efforts been made to non-custodial parents to engage them in service planning (if appropriate)?
- Is the level of caseworker or service provider contact with the family (including in-person visits and family meetings) sufficient to facilitate the desired permanency outcome?
- Are there realistic expectations on the part of all of the parties involved? Are the court's expectations realistic in view of the agency's staffing and resources?
- Have parent-child and sibling visits been facilitated in a manner that promotes and strengthens family connectedness?
Parents bear a corresponding responsibility to demonstrate reasonable progress in their service plan objectives and tasks. Reasonable progress must be documented on the CFS 497, in case notes, supervision notes and court reports.
Parents demonstrate reasonable progress by some or all of the following:
· they have learned and demonstrated their ability to assure the health, safety and development of the child;
· an increased capacity to parent and to assure the child's health and safety as evidenced by successful parent-child visits, appropriate involvement in more parental responsibilities; e.g. doctor's appointments, parent-teacher conferences, family therapy, involvement in recreational activities, better financial management, etc.
· an ability to care for themselves so that they can meet the needs of the child;
· improved parental choices, decisions and relationships which lead to a safer and healthier environment for their children;
· participation in the recommended services and demonstrated change, such as improved parenting, increased mental stability and improved functioning;
· acceptance of responsibility for maltreatment of the child and greater empathy for the impact of the maltreatment on the child;
· a better understanding of themselves resulting in an ability to identify warning signs;
· learning to ask for and accept help;
· developing an ongoing support network consisting of other family members, neighborhood or community, church, etc.;
· a willingness to develop and implement a service plan which ensures the safety of the child at home.
Lack of reasonable progress results in the implementation of the alternative permanency plan that was discussed with the family at the initial family meeting. Lack of reasonable progress must be documented on the CFS 497, in case notes, supervision notes and court reports.
Demonstrations of a lack of reasonable progress on the part of the parents include:
· parent has an ongoing pattern as a perpetrator of domestic violence and refuses to participate actively in treatment services or initiates new relationships in which there is violence;
· parent continues to reside with someone dangerous to the child and refuses to separate after having been advised of the dangers; and/or
· parent has an ongoing pattern as a victim of domestic violence and refuses to separate from the batterer or initiates new relationships in which there is violence and refuses to separate; and/or
· parent fails to remedy, with the assistance of the Department or purchase of service agency and other community resources, housing or housekeeping standards that are a threat to health or safety or to seek suggested economic resources when lack of resources is a major barrier; and/or
· continually misses visits with children. continually coming late for visits, or while visiting appears uninterested or is openly rejecting of the child;
· continually upsets children during visitation by verbal abuse, eliciting guilt, or by making unrealistic promises;
· is restricted in ability to parent due to developmental disability and has failed to make efforts or is unable to demonstrate skills necessary to ensure the health and safety of the child; and/or
· is restricted in ability to parent due to mental illness and has failed to make efforts or is unable to demonstrate skills necessary to ensure the health and safety of the child; and/or
· drugs and/or alcohol use/abuse continues to prevent them from parenting: and/or
· mother gives birth to a second or subsequent substance exposed infant; and/or
· Parent has an assessed pattern of physical aggression toward children and has continued to deny this or otherwise failed to change this pattern of interaction with children; and/or
· parent(s) has other children who have been in foster care for 12 months or more and attempts to reunite them have been unsuccessful and conditions have not changed substantially; and/or
· parent continually misses appointments, canceling appointments with Department staff or purchase of service agency staff or staff of other service or treatment providers or fails to be involved in the treatment; and
· parent otherwise fails to fulfill the tasks outlined in the service plan or cooperate with the provisions of the service plan or meet conditions established by the court which would, if the parent cooperated, correct the conditions which threatened the health, safety and well-being of the child.
In the context of child welfare, parental ambivalence refers to indecisiveness and uncertainty on the part of the parent with regard to the parent's roles, responsibilities and reunification with the child. Parental ambivalence must be assessed in determining the likelihood for reunification. The assessment of parental ambivalence is very important in evaluating the potential for reunification. Research has shown that when parents are ambivalent about parenting in general or parenting a specific child, successful family reunification is seriously impaired. Parental ambivalence needs to be acknowledged and addressed by the parents.
The following includes possible behavioral and verbal indicators that suggest the need to explore whether a parent has strong or serious ambivalence about parenting generally or about parenting a specific child. When present and unresolved, these feelings may affect the success of family reunification.
Behavioral indicators before placement:
· fails to provide basic needs;
· non-compliant with medical, health, sanitary requirements;
· creates frequent situations to be separated from children; e.g., respite, hospitalization, drops off children at sitter or day care and doesn't return as agreed, abandonment;
· frequent or inappropriate use of respite;
· lack of nurturing between parent and child/children;
· voluntarily places child in foster care, once or several times
Behavioral indicators after placement:
· inconsistent in visiting, in court appearance, and/or in use of services (assuming there are no barriers to participation in visitation or services, such as transportation);
· refuses to participate in services or minimal participation in services;
· barely meets requirements or fails to complete that "one last thing" required for reunification.
· name calling/verbally abusive to the child.
In some instances, parents speak more directly regarding their ambivalence:
· parents state they don't think they can handle a specific child or that the child might be better off somewhere else, such as in foster care;
· parent requests adoptive services, then changes mind;
· parent is verbally abusive to the child; calls child names.
SOURCE: Professional Review Action Group (PRAG): Gail Folaron, MSW, ACSW, Peg Hess, PhD, ACSW and Ann Jefferson, Child Welfare Division Director, Marion County Department of Public Welfare, May 1990.
· Throughout the case, during discussions with parents, clarify the range of options for permanency, including return home, permanent placement with relatives, voluntary relinquishment for adoption or other options. Explore parents' interest in pursuing return home at each decision point (i.e. placement, move to unsupervised and overnight visits prior to return, etc.).
· Develop case plan or service contract with parent that is very clear and specific regarding what behavioral changes are expected in relation to risk. Expect follow through. When it is clear parents will not follow through, discuss concerns with parents and request staffings to consider change in permanency goal.
· Be careful to interpret correctly the meaning of parent's statements and behaviors. For example, lack of follow through may reflect service obstacles or a realistic reaction to an inappropriate referral instead of ambivalence.
· Don't lessen expectations for changes that are necessary to ensure the child's safety.
· Verbally recognize parent hesitancy, reflect on parent's feelings, and give permission for conflicting feelings. Explore the history, depth and consistency of the ambivalence and provide counseling regarding ambivalence and the choice of permanency plan. Be specific with others serving the family about indicators of parents' ambivalence and the goal of the services requested.
· Increase frequency and length of visits and parental responsibility for the child during visits.
· Staff case with parents, child, caregivers, and all other service providers before making major case decisions.
· Use supervision to process own reactions to parents' feelings, behaviors, and the stress related to case ambiguity.
SOURCE: Professional Review Action Group (PRAG): Gail Folaron, MSW, ACSW, Peg Hess, PhD, ACSW and Ann Jefferson, Child Welfare Division Director, Marion County Department of Public Welfare, May 1990.
7.10.1 Reasonable Efforts | 7.10.2 Reasonable Progress | 7.10.3 Lack of Reasonable Progess | 7.10.4 Parental Ambivalence | 7.10.5 Approaches to Working with Ambivalent Parents