Lindsey E W, Wodarski J S
Child Welfare. 1986 May-Jun;65(3):211-30.
The findings of this study are mixed. In general, after one year of judicial-citizen review, there is no clear indication that this alternative to internal case review has led to more positive outcomes for children in foster care. This finding should be heartening to public child welfare agency personnel whose motivation for accountability has been called into question by proponents of external foster care review. At least when compared with a new citizen review system, the already existing internal review system measured up quite well. Although the study did not indicate a clear pattern of more positive outcomes for the study group, there is evidence of some favorable characteristics of CRPs that may show promise for the future. With additional training in developing behaviorally measurable and time-limited parental objectives, citizen panels may be able to maintain some of their initial strength in this area. Increased involvement of juvenile court judges in cases where little or no progress is made could motivate some parents to meet specified objectives and speed up the process of terminating parental rights when no progress has been demonstrated within specified time periods. The data also indicate a need for some adjustment to the process used to involve parents in case reviews. Another potentially positive outcome was highlighted during interviews with the juvenile court judges and the DFCS staff in the three study counties. Many of these respondents believed that the process had the potential for moving children out of foster care more quickly than does the internal review process. In addition to this primary goal, however, respondents were excited about the potential for heightened community awareness and education as citizens come to understand more about the plight of foster children and family conditions that can lead to placement. Interviews with panel members themselves indicated a definite belief that the community needed to accept more responsibility for children in foster care. One panel member's comment reflects the general sentiment expressed by other respondents: "These are kids we used to call 'those kids,' but now they are 'our kids'." It is hoped that the judicial-citizen review process will help to create a community environment in which needed resources can be developed both to prevent placement and to provide more support for families and children when placement occurs. This is the sentiment of the three juvenile court judges and almost all DFCS staff members who were interviewed, when they asserted that they felt the CRP process should be continued and expanded statewide.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
这项研究的结果喜忧参半。总体而言,经过一年的司法-公民审查后,没有明确迹象表明这种内部案件审查的替代方式为寄养儿童带来了更积极的结果。这一发现应该会让公共儿童福利机构人员感到欣慰,他们对问责制的动机一直受到外部寄养审查支持者的质疑。至少与新的公民审查系统相比,现有的内部审查系统表现相当不错。尽管该研究没有表明研究组有更积极结果的明确模式,但有证据表明儿童审查小组(CRPs)具有一些有利特征,可能对未来有借鉴意义。通过在制定可衡量行为和有时限的父母目标方面进行额外培训,公民小组也许能够保持他们在这方面的一些初始优势。少年法庭法官更多地参与进展甚微或毫无进展的案件,可能会促使一些父母实现特定目标,并在规定时间内没有进展时加快终止父母权利的进程。数据还表明,需要对让父母参与案件审查的过程进行一些调整。在对三个研究县的少年法庭法官和家庭与儿童服务部(DFCS)工作人员的访谈中,突出了另一个潜在的积极结果。这些受访者中的许多人认为,与内部审查过程相比,这个过程有可能让儿童更快地离开寄养机构。然而,除了这个主要目标外,随着公民更多地了解寄养儿童的困境以及可能导致安置的家庭状况,受访者对提高社区意识和教育的潜力感到兴奋。对小组成员本人的访谈表明,他们明确认为社区需要为寄养儿童承担更多责任。一位小组成员的评论反映了其他受访者表达的普遍情绪:“这些孩子我们过去称他们为‘那些孩子’,但现在他们是‘我们的孩子’。”希望司法-公民审查过程将有助于营造一种社区环境,在这种环境中,可以开发所需资源,既防止安置,又在安置发生时为家庭和儿童提供更多支持。这是三位少年法庭法官以及几乎所有接受访谈的家庭与儿童服务部工作人员的观点,他们坚称他们认为儿童审查小组程序应该在全州范围内继续并扩大。(摘要截选至400字)