Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Returning Children in Care to Their Families: Factors Associated with the Speed of Reunification

  • Published:
Child Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Various factors influence children’s tenure in protective care. The current study examined whether the speed of reunification with parents differs by reasons in care and social environment at intake. The effects of age and sex of the child and referral source were also examined. The study sample consists of 155 children aged 0–12 years from 92 families, who presented at Barnardos temporary care services in two metropolitan areas in Australia. Participants continuously entered the study over the 4 year study period from 1 Jan 2003 to 31 Dec 2008, the study window being 18 months since the intake. Drawing on event history analysis models two analyses were conducted: one focusing on the primary reason in care and another focusing on a risk typology based on the North Carolina Family Assessment Scale-Reunification (NCFAS-R). The risk typology developed through latent profile analysis grouped families with similar profiles of social environmental risks together. Children were reunified with their parents rapidly at the beginning until week 13 and the rate became slower but steady until the end of study period. Compared to children with parental health issues, children with parental substance abuse issues had 86% lower rate, children who experienced abuse/neglect had 83% lower rate of return, children from domestic violence situations or other issues had 73% lower rate of reunification with their parents. Compared to children with low risks in their social environment, children with high risks had 73% lower speed of reunification with their parents. The rate of reunification with parents was higher for older children whereas there was no difference on the speed of reunification by child’s sex or the source of referral. The implications for policy, practice, and research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ainsworth, F. (2001). Family preservation, family reunification and related issues: Recent news. Children Australia, 26, 29–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldgate, J. (1980). Identification of factors influencing children’s length of stay in care. In J. Triseliotis (Ed.), New developments in foster care and adoption. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison, P. (1995). Survival analysis using SAS: A practical guide. Cary: SAS Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Institute of Health and Welafre. (2009). Child protection australia 2007–08. Child Welfare Series No. 45 Cat. No. CWS33. Canberra: AIHW.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, R., Courtney, M., Berrick, J., & Albert, V. (1994). From child abuse to permanency planning. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biehal, N. (2006). Reuniting children with their families: Reconsidering the evidence on timing, contact and outcomes. British Journal of Social Work, 40, 1719–1735.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brook, J., & McDonald, T. (2009). The impact of parental substance use on the stability of family reunification from foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 13, 183–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullock, R., Gooch, D., & Little, M. (1998). Going home: The return of children separated from their families. Dartmouth: Aldershot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, S., & Ryan, J. P. (2007). Co-occurring problems for substance abusing mothers in child welfare: Matching services to improve family reunification. Children and Youth Services Review, 29, 1395–1410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleaver, H. (2000). Fostering family contact. London: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clyman, R. B., Landsverk, J., & Taussig, H. N. (2001). Children who return home from foster care: A 6-year prospective study of behavioral health outcomes in adolescence. Pediatrics, 108, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connell, C. M., Katz, K. H., Saunders, L., & Tebes, J. K. (2006). Leaving foster care—The influence of child and case characteristics on foster care exit rates. Children and Youth Services Review, 28, 780–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Courtney, M. E. (1994). Factors associated with reunification of foster children with their families. The Social Service Review, 68, 81–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Courtney, M., & Wong, Y. I. (1996). Comparing the timing of exits from substitute care. Children and Youth Services Review, 18, 307–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, I. P., Landsverk, J., Newton, R., & Ganger, W. (1996). Parental visiting and foster care reunification. Children and Youth Services Review., 18, 363–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delfabbro, P. H., Barber, J. G., & Cooper, L. L. (2003). Predictors of short-term reunification in South Australia substitute care. Child Welfare, 82, 27–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fanshel, D., & Shinn, E. B. (1978). Children in foster care: A longitudinal study. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fanshel, D., Finch, S. J., & Grundy, J. F. (1989). Modes of exit from foster care and adjustment at time of departure of children with unstable life histories. Child Welfare, 68, 391–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farmer, E. (1996). Family reunification with high-risk children: Lessons from research. Children and Youth Services Review, 18, 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farmer, E., & Moyers, S. (2005). Children placed with relatives and friends: Placement patterns and outcomes. Report to the Department of Education and Skills. School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol.

  • Fernandez, E. (1996). Significant harm: Unraveling child protection decisions and substitute care careers of children. Avebury: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, E. (1999). Representation and analysis of placement careers of children in care using event history models. Children and Youth Services Review, 21, 177–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, E., & Delfabbro, P. H. (2010). Reunification in Australia: Insights from South Australia and New South Wales. In E. Fernandez & H. P. Barth (Eds.), How does foster care work? London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, T. (1996). Going home and returning to foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 18, 383–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, M. W., Walton, E., Lewis, R. E., Pecora, P. J., & Walton, E. K. (1996). An experiment in family reunification: Correlates of outcomes at one-year follow up. Children and Youth Services Review, 18, 335–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, T. L. (2006). Child safety in reunification: A case-control study of maltreatment occurrence following return home from substitute care. Children and Youth Services Review, 27, 1293–1306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goerge, R. M. (1990). The reunification process in substitute care. Social Service Review, 64, 422–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grogan-Kaylor, A. (2001). The effect of initial placement into kinship foster care on reunification from foster care: A bivariate probit analysis. Journal of Social Service Research, 27, 1–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. A., & Courtney, M. E. (2003). The interaction of race, ethnicity, and family structure with respect to the timing of family reunification. Children and Youth Services Review, 25, 409–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, P. M., & Folaron, G. (1991). Ambivalences: A challenge to permanency for children. Child Welfare, 70, 403–424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosmer, D., Lemeshow, S., & May, S. (2008). Applied survival analysis: Regression modeling of time-to-event data (2nd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, L. (1998). The social and family correlates of successful reunification of children in foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 20, 305–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kortenkamp, K., Geen, R., & Stagner, M. (2004). The role of welfare and work in predicting foster care reunification rates for children of welfare recipients. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 577–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landsverk, J., Davis, I., Ganger, W., Newton, R., & Johnson, I. (1996). Impact of child psychological functioning on reunification from out-of-home placement. Children and Youth Services Review, 18, 447–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, R. L. (1994). Application and adaptation of intensive family preservation services to use for the reunification of foster children with their biological parents. Children and Youth Services, 16, 339–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lunn, M., & McNeil, D. (1995). Applying cox regression to competing risks. Biometrics, 51, 524–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malucio, A. N., Abramczyk, L. W., & Thomlison, B. (1996). Family reunification of children in out-of-home care: Research perspectives. Children and Youth Services Review, 18, 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, J., Ryan, J., Choi, S., & Testa, M. (2006). Integrated services for families with multiple problem: Obsticles to family reunification. Children and Youth Services Review, 28, 350–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMurty, S., & Lie, G. Y. (1992). Differential exit rates of minority children in foster care. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 28, 42–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. A., Fisher, P. A., Fetrow, B., & Jordan, K. (2006). Trouble on the journey home: Reunification failures in foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 28, 260–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthen, B., & Muthen, L. K. (2000). Integrating person-centered and variable-centered analyses: Growth mixture modeling with latent trajectory classes. Alcoholism-Clinical and Experimental Research, 24, 882–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthen & Muthen. (2007). Mplus Version 5.2. Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pecora, P. J., Whittaker, J. K., Maluccio, A. N., Barth, R. P., & Plotnick, R. D. (2000). The child welfare challenge (2nd ed.). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed-Ashcraft, K., Raymond, K., & Fraser, M. (2001). The reliability and validity of the North Carolian Family Assessment Scale. Research on Social Work Practice, 11, 503–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seaberg, J. R., & Tolley, E. S. (1986). Predictors of length of stay in foster care. Social Work Research and Abstracts, 22, 11–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, T. V. (2010). Reunification from foster care: Informing measures over time. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 475–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, I., Barker, C., Wilson, K., & Gibbs, I. (2005). Foster children: Where they and how they get on. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, B. D. (2003). How parental drug use and drug use treatment compliance relate to family reunification. Child Welfare, 82, 335–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • SPSS Inc. (2009). PASW Statistics 18 (Version 18.0.0). Chicago: SPSS, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • StataCorp. (2007). Stata statistical software: Release 10. College Station: StataCorp LP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, T. J., & Gambrill, E. D. (1977). Facilitating desiscion making in foster care: The Alameda Project. Social Service Review, 51, 502–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taussig, H. N., Clyman, R. B., & Landsverk, J. (2001). Children who return home from foster care: A 6-year prospective study of behavioural health outcomes in adolescents. Paediatrics, 108, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terling, T. (1999). The efficacy of family reunification practices: Reentry rates and correlates of reentry for abused and neglected children reunited with their families. Child Abuse and Neglect, 23, 1359–1370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walton, E., Fraser, M. W., Lewis, R. E., & Pecora, P. J. (1993). In-home family-focussed reunification: An experimental study. Child Welfare, 72, 473–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, K., & Guo, S. (1999). Reunification and reentry of foster children. Children and Youth Services Review, 21, 273–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, K., & Guo, S. (2003). Mothers’ welfare and work income and reunification with children in foster care. Children and Youth Services Review, 25, 203–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westat and Chapin Hall Center for Children (2001). Assessing the context of permanency and reunification in the foster care system. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services.

  • Wulcyzn, F. (2004). Family reunification. The Future of Children, 14, 94–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The research was supported by a grant from the Australian Research Council. We thank the caseworkers, foster carers and families of Barnardos Australia who made this work possible. The authors acknowledge Jessica Rojas for her research assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social Science and International Studies, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia

    Elizabeth Fernandez & Jung-Sook Lee

Authors
  1. Elizabeth Fernandez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jung-Sook Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth Fernandez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fernandez, E., Lee, JS. Returning Children in Care to Their Families: Factors Associated with the Speed of Reunification. Child Ind Res 4, 749–765 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-011-9121-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-011-9121-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation