Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T19:53:16.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Introducing Family Preservation in Australia: Issues in Transplanting Programs from the United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2016

Dorothy Scott
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper is based on a keynote address given at the first Australian Family Preservation Conference in Ballarat in November 1992 and addresses questions which need to be considered when transplanting programs from one service system context to another. A number of Australian States are in the process of introducing Intensive Family Preservation Services following the widespread adoption of such programs in the United States. These short term, intensive, home based therapeutic programs serve families whose children are at imminent risk of removal or who are being reunited with their family after being in out of home care. This paper argues that while such programs have the potential to provide more effective interventions with such families, placement avoidance on its own is an inappropriate outcome measure. Moreover, if the introduction of such programs is done by redirecting resources from other services, counterproductive effects may occur.

Type
Research Article
Information
Children Australia , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , 1993 , pp. 3 - 9
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bath, H. (1992) Intensive Family Preservation Services with Maltreated Children: An Investigation of Sub-Type Differences. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Bath, H. & Haapala, D. (1993) ‘Family preservation: What does the outcome research really say?’, in press.Google Scholar
Community Services Victoria, Annual Report 1991/1992.Google Scholar
Fraser, M., Pecora, P., & Haapala, D. (1991) Families in Crisis, The Impact of Intensive Family Preservation Services. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kinney, J., Haapala, D. & Booth, C. (1991) Keeping Families Together, the Homebuilders Model. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pecora, P., Whittaker, J., & Maluccio, A. (1992) The Child Welfare Challenge, Policy, Practice and Research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Russell, S. (1992) ‘Attachment Disorders: Implications for child welfare practice’, Children Australia, 17 (1), pp.20–24.Google Scholar
Schuerman, J., Rzepnicki, T., Littell, J. (1992) Evaluation of the Illinois Family First Placement Prevention Program: Progress Report, Chicago: Chapin Hall Center for Children.Google Scholar
US Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect (1990) Child Abuse and Neglect: Critical Steps in Response to a National Emergency, US Govt Printing Office.Google Scholar
Well, K & Biegel, D. (1991) Family Preservation Services, Research and Evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar