Family-centered practice is a theoretical framework that informs practice with families involved with the child welfare system (Briar-Lawson, Lawson, Hennon, & Jones, Citation2001; Epley, Summers, & Turnbull, Citation2010; Sandau, Beckler, Salcido, Beckler, Mannes, & Beck, Citation2002; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau, Citation2007). It integrates a set of principles that guide assessment and intervention when working with families who have been identified as at risk of child maltreatment. Whether conducting in-home prevention services, performing case management, or providing ongoing services to achieve reunification, family-centered practice offers direction regarding how to form a professional relationship with a family unit to partner in a change process to ensure child safety, permanency, and well-being.
In family-centered practice, the family unit remains the focus of attention; practitioners are committed to engaging and preserving the family whenever possible. Family-centered practice is also strengths based. It identifies and builds upon the internal strengths and external resources that are available to cultivate the coping and adaptation process. This approach prioritizes the professional/client relationship reinforcing the idea that change happens in the context of positive helping relationships. Family-centered practice is also empowering. Prioritizing the perspective of the child and family members and infusing the voice of the family members in decision making are essential. Finally, family-centered practice is individualized. It is expected that the cultural and personal preferences of the child and family are incorporated into decision making. These principles were recently reaffirmed in a review by Epley et al. (Citation2010) and applicability extends beyond child welfare to other practice settings including early intervention (Dunst, Boyd, Trivette, & Hamby, Citation2002), practice with children facing serious mental health distress (Kilmer, Cook, & Munsell, Citation2010) and health care (Smith, Swallow, & Coyne, Citation2015; Wong, Citation2014).
Despite the emphasis on adopting family-centered principles in child welfare, research suggests families receiving services do not consistently describe their experiences in ways that are theoretically coherent with these five principles (Lietz, Citation2011), and similar problems were also discussed regarding implementation of family-centered practice when working with children facing severe emotional disturbance (Kilmer et al., Citation2010) or disabilities (Wright, Hiebert-Murphy, & Trute, Citation2010). In studies by Smith and Donovan (Citation2003) and Michalopoulos, Ahn, Shaw, and O’Connor (Citation2012), child protective workers concur that the strengths-based, family-centered practice principles are not consistently translated to practice citing several individual and organizational factors as barriers to implementation.
As we have considered how to best advance a family-centered agenda in child welfare, it is our contention that developing an ecosystem that adopts a family-centered approach throughout all levels of services is essential. Having community services that are strengths based without altering the approach to public child welfare case management will hinder full implementation of these principles. Having child protection specialists infuse family voice in decision making while working within a family court system that focuses solely on authoritative directives will limit the impact of practices such as family group decision making. Having a court system that prioritizes family preservation without family-focused services available in that community will again fall short. A true paradigm shift will require federal and state policies, court systems, approaches to case management, and the provision of services that all reinforce family-centered principles.
The purpose of this special issue of the Journal of Family Social Work is to highlight a variety of approaches to family-centered practice that demonstrate application across multiple levels of practice. First, Jarpe-Ratner and Smithgall describe a dual professional assessment model that pairs a clinical screener with caseworkers in Illinois to enhance assessment. Caseworkers appreciated the collaboration with the screeners and specifically noted the benefit of observing modeling of strengths-based, family-centered practice during the dual-assessment process. Implementing family-centered practice must start first with conducting an assessment that identifies not just problems, but also strengths, and initiates a collaborative relationship with the family from the onset of the case.
Next, Schmid and Morgenshtern discuss the growth of family group conferencing in Canada and highlight the benefits and challenges when implementing models of decision making that prioritize family voice. Incorporating the perspectives of children and families in decision making is fundamental to effective implementation of family-centered practice. Their research highlights the role of varied interactional components of organizational change in advancing this agenda. Having policies, a shared vision, and funding to support ongoing implementation of new practices model is essential for their sustainability.
Moving beyond assessment and decisions making, Huebner et al. summarize 10 years of research regarding lessons learned in community-based services that seek to address child maltreatment and substance use disorders through a family-centered lens. The Sobriety Treatment and Recovery Team (START) program implemented in Kentucky offers implications regarding how best to support families affected by substance use. This contribution is important because it highlights service provision as an essential part of the ecosystem of child welfare.
Julien-Chinn et al. focus on the process of resilience within families who foster. This piece emphasizes foster care as a critical function within public child welfare. The research identifies the strengths that help foster families succeed when caring for children during a time at which their safety cannot be ensured by their own families. The findings offer implications for strengths-based assessment and intervention with all families, not just those who foster. Finally, Piel and Lacasse close the special issue by discussing the importance of strengths-based practice with youth while aging out of foster care. Using the behavior analytic model, youth identified the situations they found helpful as they navigated the mental health system. Findings indicate having service professionals who honored their choice and were flexible, responsive, and collaborative was highly valued by this sample of young adults.
These articles offer implications regarding theoretical and practical applications of family-centered practice across multiple dimensions of the child welfare system. Considering how these principles can inform all levels and all aspects of practice with children and families involved with the child welfare system, it is worthwhile for leaders to consider how best to translate family-centered practice principles to become consistently actualized in practice.
References
- Briar-Lawson, K., Lawson, H., Hennon, C., & Jones, A. (2001). Family-centered policies and practices: International implications. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
- Dunst, C., Boyd, K., Trivette, C., & Hamby, D. (2002). Family-oriented program models and professional helpgiving practices. Family Relations, 51(3), 221–229. doi:10.1111/fare.2002.51.issue-3
- Epley, P., Summers, J. A., & Turnbull, A. (2010). Characteristics and trends in family-centered conceptualizations. Journal of Family Social Work, 13(3), 269–285. doi:10.1080/10522150903514017
- Kilmer, R., Cook, J., & Munsell, E. P. (2010). Moving from principles to practice: Recommended policy changes to promote family-centered care. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46(3/4), 332–341. doi:10.1007/s10464-010-9350-9
- Lietz, C. A. (2011). Theoretical adherence to family centered practice: Are strengths-based principles illustrated in families’ descriptions of child welfare services? Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 888–893. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.12.012
- Michalopoulos, L., Ahn, H., Shaw, T., & O’Connor, J. (2012). Child welfare worker perception of the implementation of family-centered practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 22(6), 656–664. doi:10.1177/1049731512453344
- Sandau-Beckler, P., Salcido, R., Beckler, M. J., Mannes, M., & Beck, M. (2002). Infusing family-centered values into child protection practice. Children and Youth Services Review, 24(9/10), 719–741. doi:10.1016/S0190-7409(02)00226-8
- Smith, B. D., & Donovan, S. E. F. (2003). Child welfare practice in organizational and institutional context. Social Service Review, 77(4), 541–563. doi:10.1086/378328
- Smith, J., Swallow, V., & Coyne, I. (2015). Involving parents in managing their child’s long-term condition? A concept synthesis of family-centered care and partnership-in-care. Journal of Pediatric Nursing: Nursing Care of Children and Families, 30(1), 143–159. doi:10.1016/j.pedn.2014.10.014
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Children’s Bureau. (2007). Children’s bureau child and family services reviews practice principles. Retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/cwmonitoring/tools_guide/hand-2.htm
- Wong, O. L. (2014). Contextual barriers to the successful implementation of family-centered practice in mental health care: A Hong Kong study. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 28, 212–219. doi:10.1016/j.apnu.2014.02.001
- Wright, A., Hiebert-Murphy, D., & Trute, B. (2010). Professionals’ perspectives on organizational factors that support or hinder the successful implementation of family-centered practice. Journal of Family Social Work, 13(2), 114–130. doi:10.1080/10522150903503036