Re: Ethical Question

["Navina Forsythe" <nforsyth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am assuming that the reasoning behind this is that if a child was previously placed and returned home, and then had to be placed again are they going to try again to reunify.  If a child has to be pulled in to foster care more than once because reunification efforts have not been successful, is it in the best interest of the child to try to return home again, or to find another more permanent placement?

Either pathway leads to "best interest of the child" debates..

>>> "vernon brooks carter" <vbrooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 09/20/00 01:03PM >>>

I am working with a group who are over seeing an intensive reunification
program within a child protective services agency.

One of the stipulations in the RFA was that for a family to participate in
the program, this must be the first placement for the child. My question is,
from a social work perspective, are we as a group denying an extremely
vulnerable population, a valuable resource.

Those who participate in the program will more than likely be reunified with
their children more quickly than those who are not able to avail themselves
of the intensive reunification program.  The literature says there is a
negative association between length of time in care and reunification.
Therefore, with the passage of ASFA and its 12 month guidelines for
permanency, it would seem that those who are not in the program would be at
greater risk of having their parental rights terminated or some other
permanent plan besides reunification imposed upon the family.

The following attachment(s) could not be located:

D:\Eudora\Attach\TEXT.htm