Week 5 Flashcards
Child Welfare Services in Canada/ An overview
Canada currently has no national child welfare system.
-Each province and territory assumes responsibility for child welfare.
-First Nations child welfare is provided by the provincial agency or directly by First Nations agencies.
-Child welfare is a major area of employment for social workers
A Difficult Field of Practice
-Child welfare is also one of the most difficult areas for practitioners. It involves:
Child and family investigation
Family support
Child placement
Foster care
Guardianship
Adoption
Comprehensive Social Services for Children & Youth/ Types of Services
The services that social workers provide for children and youth can be either “in-home” or “out-of-home.”
In-home service
Provided to help family members live together harmoniously in a secure and safe environment (family counselling, parenting supports, and family educational services)
Out-of-home services
Implemented when the home situation becomes unsuitable for the child (kinship care, residential care, reunification services, and transition programs).
A framework for child protection
Political Context
Organizational mandate
Professional context
Training & supervision
Socio-historical context
Community
Economic context
Organizational resources/constraints
Client state & circumstances
Client preferences & actions
Research evidence
Professional expertise
History 1: Pre-industrial child welfare
Prior to 1890
The children of rural settler families typically worked at farming alongside other family members, and a strict division of labour was enforced.
The wife and children existed as dependents of the family patriarch.
By contrast, most Indigenous peoples of Canada believe that the connection of child to community is non-discretionary
—it is the responsibility of everyone to meet the child’s needs.
Pre-industrial child welfare
The period from 1867 to 1890 saw new laws that began to change the exalted position of husbands and fathers, but times remained difficult for children and women.
The legislative right of men to inflict arbitrary and severe punishment on their wives and children was beginning to be challenged.
This period also saw the beginning of a campaign to assimilate Indigenous children into mainstream Canadian society.
- The Late 1890s & Early 1900s
Increase In Government Involvement
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, there was a marked increase in government involvement in child welfare.
Federal and provincial legislation were enacted that allowed the state to remove children from their parents or guardians.
In the 1890s, Canadian provinces began to establish commissions to inspect the working conditions for children in factories.
Several important women’s organizations played an important role in the development of child and family welfare in this country, as well as in improvements to the status of women.
Child Welfare Laws in Quebec
The Role of the Catholic Church
-Québec was the last province in Canada to develop child welfare legislation.
-French Civil Law, the governing tradition in Québec, gave the Church the power to step in when parents failed.
-Consequently, Québec did not initiate child protection as a separate provincial service until 1933
-the Church’s influence on child welfare was strong up until the early 1960s when the Quiet Revolution happened.
Child Welfare in the 20th Century/ Changing Paradigms
Changing Paradigms
Child welfare was originally entrenched in a child-saving paradigm
—the perceived need to rescue children from abusive and neglectful parents.
By the 1920s, a new concept of “childhood” was emerging based on notions that:
Family care, even flawed family care, was better than institutional care
A natural family was better than a foster family
Child Welfare Reform/ John Joseph Kelso (1864-1935)
-J.J. Kelso was an Irish immigrant to Toronto and a child welfare pioneer.
-Helped found the Toronto Humane Society in 1887, which at the time aimed to prevent cruelty to children and animals
-Served as Superintendent of Neglected and Dependent Children in Ontario until retiring in 1934
-Helped to establish the Children’s Aid Societies throughout Ontario (60 by 1912) and in four other provinces
The Post-World War 2 Period
The Growth of Scientific Knowledge
-The post-World War II period saw an expansion of research and of empirical knowledge related to child welfare and child maltreatment.
For example:
Battered-child syndrome
The Badly Report
Battered-child syndrome
American pediatrician Dr. C. Henry Kempe identified child abuse as a regular and recurring aspect in many households rather than a sensational exception.
The Badly Report
In 1984, the Badgley Report revealed that:
-1 out of 2 females and 1 out of 3 males had at some point been the victim of unwanted sexual acts
-4 out of 5 of these acts took place during childhood or adolescence.
Expansion of Child Welfare Legislation/Shifting Trends
-During the post-war period, hundreds of pieces of new child welfare legislation were introduced across the country, altering how child welfare workers can best perform their roles.
-There was a shift from volunteers to a more professionalized service delivery system.
-Provincial governments began to accept direct responsibility for the delivery of child welfare services.
-Social work agencies began to develop and implement risk-assessment models and standardized record-keeping methods.
Emerging Approaches to Child Welfare/ The Period from 1990 to the Present
-The 1990s saw heightened media attention paid to the deaths of children known to child protection authorities.
-By 2002, eight Canadian provinces had adopted some form of risk-assessment tool (Swift, 2011: 52).
-Risk assessments estimate the likelihood that a child will be maltreated and, if a harmful event should occur, the potential severity of that harm.
Risk Assessment/ Administrative Models
-Many opponents of risk-assessment approaches argued that, in practice, these approaches contributed to the erosion of professional practice in favour of managerialism (Callahan and Swift, 2007).
-Many practitioners began to adopt a range of collaborative approaches to use alongside risk-assessment tools.
Collaborative Approaches to Child Protection
Today’s collaborative approaches are based on developing constructive and positive working relationships between social work professionals and family members.
Family Group Conference
Meditation
Cultural and/or Traditional Decision Making
Signs of Safety
Family Group Conference
Interested parties plan out the child’s safety and well-being
Meditation
Focus is on common goals and interests and mutually acceptable solutions that benefit the child.
Cultural and/or Traditional Decision Making
Following community- or culturally-based models and practices.
Signs of Safety
Collaboration between family members and child-protection workers to focus on safety planning.
A Duty to Report Child Abuse & Neglect
Everyone’s Obligation
Duty to Report. We have a duty to report child abuse and neglect if we have reasonable grounds to suspect that a child is/may be in need of protection.
The Canadian Incidence Study
A National Initiative
-The CIS is a national initiative to collect data on children who come to the attention of a child welfare authority due to alleged or suspected abuse and/or neglect.
-The CIS examines the incidence of reported child maltreatment and the characteristics of the children and families investigated by child-welfare authorities.
Child Maltreatment & Neglect in Canada
Five Broad Categories
Child abuse and maltreatment can take many forms.
-Physical abuse
-Sexual abuse
-Neglect
-Emotional maltreatment
-Exposure to domestic violence
First Nations/ Indigenous Child Welfare….. Addressing Systemic Risks
-Addressing Systemic Risks
-Indigenous children in Canada are over-represented in out-of-home care
-They make up just 15% of the total child population, but 40% of children in care.
-There are more First Nations children in foster care today than at the height of Residential Schools.
-Millennium Scoop
First Nations Child Welfare/ Systemic Risks
-Over-representation is tied to low incomes and poor housing conditions in Indigenous communities.
-It is exacerbated by social issues of substance use and domestic violence.
-Also linked to historical practices, in particular, the period of the “Sixties Scoop” and the placement of First Nations children in residential schools.
-We should not only look at child welfare through the dominant, Eurocentric/Western, forensic lens, but we must understand cultural and Indigenous perspectives in order to help Indigenous and non-White children
First Nations Children in Care/ Family Risk vs Structural Risk
-Family Risk vs. Structural Risk
Blackstock et al. (2006) argued that it is important to differentiate between family risk and structural risk.
-Family risks include lack of supervision by parents & parental abuse
-Structural risks include:
Housing –homelessness/neighbourhood characteristics
Poverty
Income & employment
Health care accessibility
Racism & discrimination
Lack of resources
Individual vs Structural Orientation
-Child-protection legislation tends to take an individualistic approach i.e., responsibility rests with the parent(s)/guardian(s) to provide a safe and supportive environment for the child.
-Many researchers and practitioners argue for an approach that addresses systemic issues, such as poverty and discrimination.
-Individual problems may be connected to societal problems
Reporting Child Abuse/ Maltreatment/ Best Practices
Child-welfare service procedures are outlined in various provincial standards manuals. The stages typically are:
-Initial response. Workers collect information from various sources, including the child and other family members.
-Investigation. Includes conducting an interview with the person reporting the abuse and with other individuals.
-Substantiation. How much proof/evidence is enough to make a decision?
-Assessment report and service plan. If abuse is verified, the law requires a plan of service for the child and family.
-Case management. Coordination of services and allocating a professional for implementation of plans.
Social Work & Substitute Care/ A Last Report
-If a child protection agency or a court decides that maltreatment of a child has been substantiated, substitute care may be required.
-Typically seen as a last-resort measure in cases where the risk to the child is assessed to be significant.
-Normally foster care is the “placement of choice” for younger children who are deemed to be in need of substitute care.
-For older children, the placement of choice is a group home.
Best Interests vs. Least Restrictive Approaches
Child-welfare practitioners usually try to seek a balance between two types of approaches:
-The best interests approach emphasizes the protection and well-being of the child above all else.
-The least restrictive approach emphasizes the course of action that will cause the least disruption or change for the child, preferably leaving him or her with the family if at all possible
Social Work & Substitute Care/ Foster Homes
Foster homes provide substitute parenting for children
*who cannot safely stay with their own families,
*for children whose families have asked for help, or
*for children whose families need specific or periodic help in caring for their children.
The child is entitled to receive:
physical care, such as clothing, food, and shelter;
emotional care, including love and inclusion;
nurturing of both intellectual and emotional development;
guidance and supervision; and
positive role modelling
Social Work & Substitute Care/ Group Homes
-Staffed group care residences should have between two and eight young people
-Three factors are important in influencing a young person’s experience in a group home:
-Creating an extrafamilial environment
-Responding to pain and pain-based behaviour
-Developing a sense of normality
Indigenous Children & Their Families/ The Legacy of Colonialism
-The impoverished conditions of Indigenous peoples are rooted in a legacy of colonialism and policies that for decades separated children from their families.
-Research confirms that the average child poverty rate for Indigenous children is 40%, in contrast to the average child poverty rate for all children in Canada, which is 17%.
-50% of Status First Nations children live in poverty in a First Nations community.
-First Nations child-welfare agencies are chronically underfunded.
Indigenous Children & Their Families/ Jordan’s Principle
-Jordan’s Principle calls on all government institutions and departments to ensure that children’s needs are met first and jurisdictional disputes are resolved later.
-This approach was named for Jordan River Anderson, a child from Norway House Cree Nation in Manitoba.
-Jordan remained in hospital for several years because neither the federal nor the provincial government would take responsibility for funding his at-home care. He died in 2005 at the age of five.
Black Children & Their Families
-Black children are not faring better than Indigenous children & their families
-Legacy of racism and anti-Black racism
-Over-representation of Black kids in care
Suffer more intrusive forms of intervention
Less access to appropriate services & poorer outcomes
Campaign 2000
Working to End Child Poverty in Canada
Campaign 2000 arose as a non-partisan, cross-Canada, public education movement to build awareness and support for an all-party House of Commons resolution.
Poverty is the leading structural risk associated with the removal of children, especially Indigenous & Black children.
Children in Poverty in Canada
-Canada’s child poverty rate is higher than most other wealthy countries
-38% of food bank users are children
-Child poverty is attributed to government policies & failure of politicians to implement good policies
-Face of poverty has changed from lone/single mother on welfare to working-poor mother with at least one job
-Income is the strongest predictor of health outcomes
-Child poverty is linked with the income of their parents/guardians
-Market place not providing adequate income for Canadian families
-Lots of “working poor” parents in Canada
-Financial strain can lead to family breakdown & contribute to social problems (e.g., crime)
-Not all children who live in families with low income are on social assistance
The 4 Reasons for having Child-Related Income Security Benefits
- Deal with child poverty by providing a minimum income
Supplement income of lower-income families and children - Generate ‘horizontal equity’ for households with children compared to those without children
Horizontal equity is based on the idea that parents with children have higher/heavier financial demands than childless couples and single persons with the same income - Act as economic stimulus by putting money in hands of those most likely to spend it
Provide a monthly cheque that can be spent on necessities - Recognize parents as contributors to society’s future
The children of today are the future.
Families with children contribute something that people without children do not
Child-Related Income Security Benefits
Child Tax Exemption
Mother’s Allowance
Family Allowance/Baby Bonus (1945)
Refundable Child Tax Credit
Child Tax Benefits (1993)
Consolidated FA, CTB & RCTC
Working Income Supplement
Canada Child Tax Benefit (1997/8)
National Child Benefit Supplement (1997)
Universal Child Care Benefit (2006)
Canada Child Benefit (2017)
Replaces CCTB & UCCB
