Improving collaboration: a qualitative assessment of inter-agency collaboration between a pilot Multisystemic Therapy Child Abuse and Neglect (MST-CAN) program and a child protection team

Abstract

Objective:

Child protection inter-agency collaboration is characterized by strengths and problems. Some literature notes positive attitudes and high trust between teams. However, difficulties with communication, confidentiality, roles, boundaries and divergent paradigms reconciling child protection and parent mental health needs have been documented. This study investigated whether a pilot model of intensive family intervention for maltreated children and associated intensive inter-agency cooperation delivered an effective collaboration.

Method:

At the completion of the pilot program, a child protection team was interviewed. A qualitative assessment by semi-structured group interview format of inter-agency collaboration was undertaken and evaluated by a thematic analysis.

Results:

The analysis identified: strong endorsement of the collaborative model; no changes in perception of referred patients; changes in treatment approaches. No perceived conflict between child protection and parent mental health needs were noted.

Conclusions:

The changes noted may be due to the unique structure and functioning of the pilot Multisystemic Therapy Child Abuse and Neglect program, which encouraged high levels of team communication, strong client engagement, availability and intensive treatment of child and parent mental health problems. The implications for future collaborations are discussed as well as limitations of the study.

Keywords

child maltreatment inter-agency collaboration

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Commonwealth of Australia. Australia’s children: safe and well: a national framework for protecting Australia’s children: a discussion paper for consultation. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2008.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Child protection Australia: 2011–12. Child Welfare series no 55. Canberra: AIHW, 2013.

Council of Australian Governments. Protecting children is everyone’s business: National Frameworkfor Protecting Australia’s Children 2009-2020. In: Commonwealth of Australia, (ed.). Canberra: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA), 2009.

Bromfield

Lamont

Parker

Horsfall

. Issues for the safety and wellbeing of children in families with multiple and complex problems. National Child Protection Clearinghouse. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2010, p. 1–24.

Swenson

Chaffin

. Beyond psychotherapy: treating abused children by changing their social ecology. Aggress Violent Behav 2006; 11: 120–137.

Munro

. What tools do we need to improve identification of child abuse? Child Abuse Rev 2005; 14: 374–388.

Bai

Wells

Hillemeier

. Coordination between child welfare agencies and mental health service providers, children’s service use, and outcomes. Child Abuse Negl 2009; 33: 372–381.

Darlington

Feeney

Rixon

. Interagency collaboration between child protection and mental health services: practices, attitudes and barriers. Child Abuse Negl 2005; 29: 1085–1098.

Webber

McCree

Angeli

. Inter-agency joint protocols for safeguarding children in social care and adult mental-health agencies: a cross-sectional survey of practitioner experiences. Child Fam Soc Work 2013; 18: 149–58.

10.

Chuang

Wells

. The role of interagency collaboration in facilitating receipt of behavioral health services for youth involved with child welfare and juvenile justice. Child Youth Serv Rev 2010; 32: 1814–1822.

11.

Lalayants

. Multidisciplinary collaboration in child protective clinical consultations: perceptions of best practices. J Public Child Welf 2013; 7: 253–274.

12.

Parton

. How child centred are our child protection systems and how child centred do we want our child protection regulatory principles to be? Commun Child Fam Aust 2009; 4: 59–64.

13.

Lalayants

. Interagency collaboration approach to service delivery in child abuse and neglect: perceptions of professionals. Int J Interdisciplin Soc Sci 2008; 3: 225–336.

14.

Darlington

Feeney

. Collaboration between mental health and child protection services: professionals’ perceptions of best practice. Child Youth Serv Rev 2008; 30: 187–198.

15.

Darlington

Feeney

Rixon

. Complexity, conflict and uncertainty: issues in collaboration between child protection and mental health services. Child Youth Serv Rev 2004; 26: 1175–1192.

16.

Darlington

Feeney

Rixon

. Practice challenges at the intersection of child protection and mental health. Child Fam Soc Work 2005; 10: 239–247.

17.

Darlington

Healy

Feeney

. Challenges in implementing participatory practice in child protection: a contingency approach. Child Youth Serv Rev 2010; 32: 1020–1027.

18.

Darlington

Healy

Feeney

. Approaches to assessment and intervention across four types of child and family welfare services. Child Youth Serv Rev 2010; 32: 356–364.

19.

Higgins

Kaspiew

Child Protection and Family Law,: Joining the Dots. National Child Protection Clearinghouse. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies, 2011, p. 1–24.

20.

Queensland Government. A blueprint for implementing the recommendations of the January 2004 Crime and Misconduct Commission Report “Protecting children: An inquiry into abuse of children in foster care”. Brisbane, Australia: Queensland Government, 2004.

21.

Stallman

Walmsley

Bor

. New directions in treatment of child physical abuse and neglect in Australia: MST-CAN a case study. Adv Ment Health 2010; 9: 148–161.

22.

Bor

Stallman

Collerson

. Therapy implications of child abuse in multi-risk families. Australas Psychiatry 2013; 21: 389–392.

23.

National Health and Medical Research Council. National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research and ethical review and research involving only low or negligible risk. Canberra, Australia: National Health and Medical Research Council, 2013, p. 1–2.

24.

University of Western Australia. Research: Obtaining Ethics Approval. Perth, Western Australia: University of Western Australia, 2013.

25.

Massey

. A proposed model for the analysis and interpretation of focus groups in evaluation research. Eval Program Plan 2011; 34: 21–28.

26.

Vaismoradi

Turunen

Bondas

. Content analysis and thematic analysis: implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs Health Sci 2013; 15: 398–405.