Achieving agreement on service needs in child protection. Comparing children’s, mothers’ and practitioners’ views over time and between approaches

IF 1.4 Q2 SOCIAL WORK
Elina Aaltio, Sirpa Kannasoja
{"title":"Achieving agreement on service needs in child protection. Comparing children’s, mothers’ and practitioners’ views over time and between approaches","authors":"Elina Aaltio, Sirpa Kannasoja","doi":"10.1108/jcs-12-2021-0052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nWhile studies on service users’ participation and their perceptions on the quality of services exist, agreement between family members’ and practitioners’ assessments of the family’s situation has received less interest. The purpose of this paper is to investigate agreement and its effect on outcomes by comparing the viewpoints of three groups of informants (children, mothers and practitioners) in the context of statutory child protection in two study groups – one applying a systemic approach (SPM) and a service-as-usual control group (SAU).\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA quasi-experimental repeated-measures study design was applied. Outcome data comprised 112 cases (SPM cases n = 56 and SAU cases n = 56) at three sites. Data was collected from all participants at baseline and six months later.\n\n\nFindings\nFirst, practitioners’ analyses of a child’s need for protection did not meet family members’ expressed need for help. Second, child–mother agreement on the need for service intervention at T1 predicted a decrease in practitioner-assessed abuse or neglect from T1 to T2. In this sample, no differences were found between the two groups.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis study highlights the importance of making explicit the viewpoints of children, parents and practitioners in casework and research to improve understanding of how their perspectives differ over the course of the process and how possible initial disagreements affect outcomes.\n","PeriodicalId":45244,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Childrens Services","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Childrens Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcs-12-2021-0052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose While studies on service users’ participation and their perceptions on the quality of services exist, agreement between family members’ and practitioners’ assessments of the family’s situation has received less interest. The purpose of this paper is to investigate agreement and its effect on outcomes by comparing the viewpoints of three groups of informants (children, mothers and practitioners) in the context of statutory child protection in two study groups – one applying a systemic approach (SPM) and a service-as-usual control group (SAU). Design/methodology/approach A quasi-experimental repeated-measures study design was applied. Outcome data comprised 112 cases (SPM cases n = 56 and SAU cases n = 56) at three sites. Data was collected from all participants at baseline and six months later. Findings First, practitioners’ analyses of a child’s need for protection did not meet family members’ expressed need for help. Second, child–mother agreement on the need for service intervention at T1 predicted a decrease in practitioner-assessed abuse or neglect from T1 to T2. In this sample, no differences were found between the two groups. Originality/value This study highlights the importance of making explicit the viewpoints of children, parents and practitioners in casework and research to improve understanding of how their perspectives differ over the course of the process and how possible initial disagreements affect outcomes.
就儿童保护方面的服务需求达成一致。随着时间的推移以及不同方法之间比较儿童、母亲和从业者的观点
目的虽然有关于服务用户参与度及其对服务质量的看法的研究,但家庭成员和从业者对家庭状况的评估之间的一致性却不太受关注。本文的目的是通过比较两个研究组中三组知情者(儿童、母亲和从业者)在法定儿童保护背景下的观点来调查一致性及其对结果的影响——一组采用系统方法(SPM),另一组采用照常服务对照组(SAU)应用了设计。结果数据包括三个部位的112例病例(SPM病例n=56和SAU病例n=56)。数据是在基线和六个月后从所有参与者那里收集的。发现首先,从业者对儿童保护需求的分析没有满足家庭成员表达的帮助需求。其次,儿童-母亲在T1时对服务干预需求的一致性预测,从T1到T2,医生评估的虐待或忽视会减少。在这个样本中,两组之间没有发现差异。独创性/价值这项研究强调了在个案工作和研究中明确儿童、父母和从业者的观点的重要性,以更好地理解他们的观点在整个过程中的差异,以及最初可能的分歧如何影响结果。
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
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
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