An evaluation of a service to keep children safe in families with mental health and/or substance abuse issues

Abstract

Objective:

The objective of this study was to evaluate a specialised service designed to improve parenting capacity, child safety and family functioning in the context of parental mental health, drug and alcohol and child protection concerns.

Method:

Client data was collected over a period of 3 years and 3 months, including demographic characteristics, service usage, presenting issues and pre and post revised North Carolina Family Assessment Scale (NCFAS-G) scores.

Results:

A significant improvement between intake and discharge occurred on the majority of the 58 NCFAS-G subscale items (32/58). In particular, most significant change occurred in the domains ‘family safety’ (p < 0.001) and ‘family interactions’ (p < 0.001).

Conclusion:

Specialised programs can assist families with child safety concerns suffering from mental health and/or drug and alcohol problems.

Keywords

parental mental health child protection concerns service evaluation parental drug and alcohol problems risk of significant harm

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.

Wood

Report of the Special Commission of Inquiry into Child Protection Services in NSW. State of NSW through the Special Commission of Inquiry into Child Protection Services in NSW, 2008.

Child Family Community Australia. CFCA resource sheet: who abuses children?, https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children (2014, accessed 19 February).

Fernandez

Supporting children and responding to their families: capturing the evidence on family support. Children Youth Serv Rev 2007; 29: 1368–1394.

Child Family Community Australia. CFCA resource sheet: the economic costs of child abuse and neglect, https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/economic-costs-child-abuse-and-neglect (2014, accessed 18 November 2015).

Huebner

Robertson

Roberts

. Family preservation: cost avoidance and child and family service review outcomes. J Public Child Welfare 2012; 6: 206–224.

Coates

Working with families with parental mental health and/or drug and alcohol issues where there are child protection concerns: inter-agency collaboration. Child Fam Social Work Epub 16 Jun 2015. DOI: 10.1111/cfs.12238.

Coates

Howe

Working with families who experience parental mental health and/or drug and alcohol problems in the context of child protection concerns: recommendations for service improvement. Aust N Z J Fam Ther 2015; 36: 325–341.

Swenson

Schaeffer

Henggeler

. Multisystemic therapy for child abuse and neglect: a randomized effectiveness trial. J Fam Psychol 2010; 24: 497–507.

10.

Turner

Powell

Langhinrichsen-Rohling

. Helping families initiative: intervening with high-risk students through a community, school, and district attorney partnership. Child Adolesc Social Work J 2009; 26: 209–223.

11.

Kirk

Kim

Griffith

DP.

Advances in the reliability and validity of the North Carolina family assessment scale. J Hum Behav Social Environ 2008; 11: 157–176.

12.

Reed-Ashcraft

Kirk

Fraser

The reliability and validity of the North Carolina family assessment scale. Res Social Work Pract 2001; 11: 503–520.

13.

Taylor

Moore

Pezzullo

. The cost of child abuse in Australia. Melbourne: Australian Childhood Foundation and Child Abuse Prevention Research Australia; 2008.