An International Scoping Review of Empirical Research in Relation to the Recruitment and Assessment of LGBTQ+ Communities in the Adoption Process

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Lucille Kelsall-Knight, Caroline Bradbury-Jones
{"title":"An International Scoping Review of Empirical Research in Relation to the Recruitment and Assessment of LGBTQ+ Communities in the Adoption Process","authors":"Lucille Kelsall-Knight,&nbsp;Caroline Bradbury-Jones","doi":"10.1155/2024/5451383","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><i>Objectives</i>. The goal of this review is to identify the experiences of the adoption assessment process for LGBTQ + adoptive parents. The intention is to highlight the scope of current literature, identify any research gaps, and from these, make recommendations for policy, practice, and research. <i>Design</i>. A scoping review. <i>Methods</i>. Social Policy and Practice, Medline, PsychINFO, ASSIA, British Education Index, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, Scopus, Social Services Abstracts, and Google Scholar databases were searched. Articles were screened at the title and abstract level and at full text by two reviewers. The PAGER framework for scoping reviews was utilised. <i>Results</i>. A total of 413 articles were screened at the title and abstract level, of which 74 were also assessed at full text for eligibility. The 16 studies identified for inclusion originated from 6 different countries, with the most prevalent being the United States (10). <i>Conclusions</i>. Adoption processes are heterocentric which creates difficulty for LGBTQ + people in navigating them effectively. Examples of inclusive practice are evident in the literature. Process change and inclusion need to occur at organizational and policy levels rather than being the sole responsibility of social care practitioners. Future research is needed with underrepresented groups within the LGBTQ + community.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48195,"journal":{"name":"Health & Social Care in the Community","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/5451383","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health & Social Care in the Community","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/5451383","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives. The goal of this review is to identify the experiences of the adoption assessment process for LGBTQ + adoptive parents. The intention is to highlight the scope of current literature, identify any research gaps, and from these, make recommendations for policy, practice, and research. Design. A scoping review. Methods. Social Policy and Practice, Medline, PsychINFO, ASSIA, British Education Index, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, Scopus, Social Services Abstracts, and Google Scholar databases were searched. Articles were screened at the title and abstract level and at full text by two reviewers. The PAGER framework for scoping reviews was utilised. Results. A total of 413 articles were screened at the title and abstract level, of which 74 were also assessed at full text for eligibility. The 16 studies identified for inclusion originated from 6 different countries, with the most prevalent being the United States (10). Conclusions. Adoption processes are heterocentric which creates difficulty for LGBTQ + people in navigating them effectively. Examples of inclusive practice are evident in the literature. Process change and inclusion need to occur at organizational and policy levels rather than being the sole responsibility of social care practitioners. Future research is needed with underrepresented groups within the LGBTQ + community.

Abstract Image

有关在收养过程中招募和评估 LGBTQ+ 群体的实证研究的国际范围审查
目标。本综述旨在确定 LGBTQ + 收养父母在收养评估过程中的经历。其目的是突出当前文献的范围,找出任何研究空白,并据此为政策、实践和研究提出建议。设计。范围审查。方法。检索《社会政策与实践》、Medline、PsychINFO、ASSIA、《英国教育索引》、《国际社会科学书目》、Scopus、《社会服务文摘》和 Google Scholar 数据库。由两名审稿人对文章的标题、摘要和全文进行筛选。采用 PAGER 框架进行范围界定审查。结果。共筛选了 413 篇文章的标题和摘要,并对其中 74 篇文章的全文进行了资格评估。确定纳入的 16 项研究来自 6 个不同的国家,其中最多的是美国(10 项)。结论。领养过程是以异性为中心的,这给 LGBTQ+ 人士有效地驾驭领养过程造成了困难。包容性实践的例子在文献中显而易见。流程变革和包容性需要在组织和政策层面进行,而不仅仅是社会护理从业人员的责任。未来需要对 LGBTQ + 群体中代表性不足的群体进行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
423
期刊介绍: Health and Social Care in the community is an essential journal for anyone involved in nursing, social work, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, general practice, health psychology, health economy, primary health care and the promotion of health. It is an international peer-reviewed journal supporting interdisciplinary collaboration on policy and practice within health and social care in the community. The journal publishes: - Original research papers in all areas of health and social care - Topical health and social care review articles - Policy and practice evaluations - Book reviews - Special issues
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信