The Iowa Mediation for Permanency Project (IMPP), a nonadversarial mediation-based approach founded on the principles of attachment and empowerment, is a promising way to achieve permanency for children, a national priority in child welfare established by The Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. The IMPP broadens the concept of permanency to include reunification and guardianship. The authors discuss its implementation, including qualifications and requirements of mediators, examine an independent evaluation of the results, and present two case histories.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adoption and Safe Families Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1305 (1997).
2.
Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980, Pub. L. 96–272.
3.
BahrS. J. (1981). An evaluation of court mediation: A comparison of divorce cases with children. Journal of Family Issues, 2, 39–60.
4.
BarskyA. E. (1996). Mediation and empowerment in child protection cases. Mediation Quarterly, 14, 111–134.
5.
BarskyA. E., & TrocmeN. (1998). The essential aspects of mediation in child protection cases. Children and Youth Services Review, 290, 629–656.
6.
BenjaminM., & IrvingH. H. (1995). Research in family mediation: Review and implications. Mediation Quarterly, 13, 53–82.
7.
ChandlerS. M. (1985). Mediation: Conjoint problem solving. Social Work, 39, 346–349.
8.
CookR. (1992). A national evaluation of Title IV-E foster care independent living programs for youth: Phase 2, final report.Rockville, MD: Westat.
9.
CourtneyM. E., & BarthR. P. (1996). Pathways of older adolescents out of foster care: Implications for independent living services. Social Work, 41, 75–83.
10.
DillonP. A., & EmeryR. E. (1996). Divorce mediation and resolution of child custody disputes: Long-term effects. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 66, 131–140.
11.
EdwardsL., & BaronS. (1995). Alternatives to contested litigation in child abuse and neglect cases. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 33, 275–285.
12.
EmeryR. E., & WyerM. M. (1987). Child custody mediation and litigation: An experimental evaluation of the experience of parents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 179–186.
FahlbergV. (1993). A child's journey through placement.Indianapolis, IN: Perspective Press.
15.
GalawayB. (1988). Crime victim and offender mediation as a social work strategy. Social Service Review, 62, 668–683.
16.
GentryD. B. (1997). Including children in divorce mediation and education: Potential benefits and cautions. Families in Society, 78, 307–315.
17.
GibelmanM., & DemoneH. W.Jr. (1989). The social worker as mediator in the legal system. Social Casework, 70, 28–36.
18.
GiovannucciM. T. (1997). Understanding the role of the mediator in child protection proceedings. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 35, 143–148.
19.
HeathD. T. (1998). Qualitative analysis of private mediation: Benefits for families in public child welfare agencies. Children and Youth Services Review, 20, 605–627.
20.
JonesT. S., & BodtkerA. (1999). Agreement, maintenance, satisfaction and relitigation in mediated and non-mediated custody cases: A research note. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 32, 17–30.
21.
LandsmanM. J., & ThompsonK. (2001). The Iowa Mediation for Permanency Project: Final Report.Iowa City: University of Iowa, Department of Social Work.
22.
LandsmanM. J., TylerM., BlackJ., & MaloneK. (1999). The Permanency for Teens Project: Final Report.Iowa City: University of Iowa, Department of Social Work.
23.
MallonG. P. (1998). After care, then where? Outcomes of an independent living program. Child Welfare, 77, 61–78.
24.
MangioneT. W. (1995). Mail surveys: Improving the quality.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
McMillenJ. C., & TuckerJ. (1999). The status of older adolescents at exit from out-of-home care. Child Welfare, 78, 339–360.
27.
MooreC. (1986). The mediation process: Practical strategies for resolving conflict.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
28.
NugentW. R., UmbreitM. S., WinamakiL., & PaddockJ. (2001). Participation in victim–offender mediation and reoffense: Successful replications?Research on Social Work Practice, 11, 5–23.
29.
PalmerS. E. (1989). Mediation in child protection cases: An alternative to the adversary system. Child Welfare, 68, 21–31.
30.
ParsonsR. J. (1991). The mediator role in social work practice. Social Work, 36, 483–487.
31.
ParsonsR. J., & CoxE. O. (1989). Family mediation in elder care decisions: An empowerment intervention. Social Work, 34, 122–126.
32.
RycusJ. S., & HughesR. C. (1998). Field guide to child welfare: Placement and permanence.Washington, DC: Child Welfare League of America.
33.
SavouryG. R., BealsH. L., & ParksJ. M. (1995). Mediation in child protection: Facilitating the resolution of disputes. Child Welfare, 74, 843–862.
34.
SeversonM. M., & BankstonT. V. (1995). Social work and the pursuit of justice through mediation. Social Work, 49, 683–690.
35.
ThoennesN. (1997). An evaluation of child protection mediation in five California courts. Family and Conciliation Courts Review, 35, 184–195.
36.
ThoennesN. (2000). Dependency mediation: Help for families and courts. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 51(2), 13–22.
37.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2001). The AFCARS Report.Washington, DC: Administration for Children, Youth and Families, Children's Bureau.
