4.5 Article

Every state for itself: A comparison of states' visitation guidelines with research studies

Journal

CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES REVIEW
Volume 151, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.107049

Keywords

Visitation; Child welfare; Indirect contact; Guidelines; Benefits; Harms

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Visitation between children in care and their families is crucial, but workers often lack the skills to handle it effectively. This study analyzed visitation guidelines from US state child welfare agencies and found that they lack specificity and do not align with research findings. Updating and expanding these guidelines is necessary to improve practice.
Contact between children in care and their families and affiliates is an important component of child welfare practice. Depending on how visitation is handled and the readiness of the parties to interact, contact can result in positive or negative effects. However, scholars find that workers who supervise and arrange visitation often lack the requisite skills and knowledge to conduct visits in the most beneficial ways. As agency policies, particularly when they are research-informed, influence practice, this study analyzes the guidelines on visitation collected from the state child welfare agencies in the United States of America (USA) and compares them with research findings and researchers' recommendations for best practices. The materials analyzed were collected from 43 states and included pages from policy manuals or administrative standards, tip sheets for case workers, brochures developed for families, stand-alone guidelines, and documentation forms. The guidelines vary widely in terms of the amount and specificity of information they contain, but their overall coverage of topics is sparse and not always in line with research findings. A need exists to update and expand the guidelines, which could then function as one tool to improve practice.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available