Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T20:12:24.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Permanency Planning Concepts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2012

Jennifer Osmond  and
Clare Tilbury
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Permanency, stability and continuity are essential components of quality out-of-home care. Permanency planning is a case planning process designed to promote stability and long-term connections for children subject to child protection intervention. This paper outlines findings from a small qualitative study that explored perceptions of permanency planning held by child protection practitioners, carers, and the parents of children in care in Queensland, Australia. Findings show that each group emphasised different aspects of permanency. Practitioners tended to focus on placement arrangements, carers focused on relationships and security, and parents were concerned about the quality of care their children received. Everyone involved in permanency decisions – whether children and young people, parents, carers or child protection practitioners – has ideas, theories and knowledge that they draw upon in expressing their views. Understanding these perspectives is useful for the decision-making process, as each stakeholder communicates with others about what they think is most important for the child. Implications for child protection practice include having a clear practice language and approach to permanency planning, exploring the unique areas of importance to different stakeholders on permanency planning, and ensuring quality participatory practice.

Keywords

out-of-home carepermanencyknowledge utilisation
Type
Research Article
Information
Children Australia , Volume 37 , Issue 3 , September 2012 , pp. 100 - 107
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2012

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

Barber, J.G., & Delfabbro, P.H. (2003). Placement stability and the psychosocial well-being of children in foster care. Research on Social Work Practice, 13 (4), 415–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biehal, N. (2007). Reuniting children with their families: Reconsidering the evidence on timing, contact and outcomes. British Journal of Social Work, 37, 807–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cashmore, J. (2001). What can we learn from the US experience on permanency planning? Australian Journal of Family Law, 15, 215–229.Google Scholar
Chenoweth, L., & McAuliffe, D. (2008). The road to social work and human service practice (2nd ed.). South Melbourne, Victoria: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Cuddeback, G.S. (2004). Kinship family foster care: A methodological and substantive synthesis of research. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 623–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dance, C., & Rushton, A. (2005). Joining a new family: The views and experiences of young people placed with permanent families during middle childhood. Adoption & Fostering, 29 (1),18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowling, M. (2006). Translating theory into practice? The implications for practitioners and users and carers. Practice, 18 (1), 17–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dudley, J.R. (2011). Research methods for social work. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Farmer, E. (2009). How do placements in kinship care compare with those in non-kin foster care: Placement patterns, progress and outcomes? Child and Family Social Work, 14, 331–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freundlich, M., Avery, R.J., Munson, S., & Gerstenzang, S. (2006). The meaning of permanency in child welfare: Multiple stakeholder perspectives. Children and Youth Services Review, 28, 741–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glasby, J., & Beresford, P. (2006). Who knows best? Evidence-based practice and the service user contribution. Critical Social Policy, 26 (1), 268–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harden, B.J. (2004). Safety and stability for foster children: A developmental perspective. The Future of Children, 14 (1), 31–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Healy, K. (2005). Social work theories in context. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Howe, E., Dooley, T., & Hinings, D. (2000). Assessment and decision-making in a case of child neglect and abuse using an attachment perspective. Child and Family Social Work, 5, 143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maas, H., & Engler, R. (1959). Children in need of parents, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Maluccio, A., Fein, E., & Olmstead, K.A. (1986). Permanency planning for children: Concepts and methods, London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Olsson, E., & Ljunghill, J. (1997). The practitioner and naïve theory in social work intervention processes. British Journal of Social Work, 27 (6), 931–950.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oosterman, M., Schuengel, C., Slot, N.W., Bullens, R.A.R., & Doreleijers, T.A.H., (2007). Disruptions in foster care: A review and meta-analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 29 (1), 53–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osmond, J. (2006). Knowledge use in social work practice: Examining its functional possibilities. Journal of Social Work, 6 (3), 221–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osmond, J., & O'Connor, I. (2006). The use of theory and research in social work practice: Implications for evidence-based practice. Australian Social Work, 59 (1), 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, M. (2005). Modern social work theory (3rd ed.). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. (1990). Lessons from the past: Issues for social work theory, London: Tavistock/Routledge.Google Scholar
Sanchez, R.M. (2004). Youth perspectives on permanency, Oakland, CA: California Permanency for Youth Project.Google Scholar
Schofield, G. (2009). Permanence in foster care. In Schofield, G. & Simmonds, J. (Eds.), The child protection handbook: Research, policy and practice (pp. 139–158). London: BAAF.Google Scholar
Schofield, G., Thoburn, J., Howell, D., & Dickens, J. (2007). The search for stability and permanence: Modelling the pathways of long-stay looked after children. British Journal of Social Work, 37 (4), 619–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selwyn, J. (2010). The challenges in planning for permanency. Adoption and Fostering, 34 (3), 32–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selwyn, J., & Quinton, D. (2004). Stability, permanence, outcomes and support: Foster care and adoption compared. Adoption & Fostering, 28 (4), 6–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shemmings, D., & Shemmings, Y. (1996). Building trust with families when making enquiries. In Platt, D. & Shemmings, D. (Eds.), Making enquiries into alleged child abuse and neglect: Partnerships with parents (pp. 67–85). Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Stott, T., & Gustavsson, N. (2010). Balancing permanency and stability for youth in foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 619–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thoburn, J. (2002). Adoption and permanency for children who cannot live safely with birth parents or relatives. Quality Protects Research Briefing 5. London: Department of Health/Making Research Count/Research in Practice.Google Scholar
Tilbury, C. (2009). A ‘stock and flow’ analysis of Australian child protection data. Communities, Children and Families Australia, 4 (2), 9–17.Google Scholar
Tilbury, C., & Osmond, J. (2006). Permanency planning in foster care: A research review and guidelines for practitioners. Australian Social Work, 59 (3), 265–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Twardosz, S., & Lutzker, J.R. (2010). Child maltreatment and the developing brain: A review of neuroscience perspectives. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, 15, 59–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unrau, Y.A., Seita, J.R., & Putney, K.S. (2008). Former foster youth remember multiple placement moves: A journey of loss and hope. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 1256–1266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wise, S. (2000). Introducing a symposium on permanency planning. Children Australia, 25 (4), 4–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar