Perceptions of parental substance use disorders in cross-system collaboration among child welfare, alcohol and other drugs, and dependency court organizations
Abstract Cross-system collaboration among child welfare (CW), alcohol and other drugs (AOD), and court organizations shows promise in addressing the many needs of CW-involved families experiencing parental substance use disorders (SUDs). Research has suggested that differing perceptions of parents w...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Child abuse & neglect 2014-05, Vol.38 (5), p.939-951 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Abstract Cross-system collaboration among child welfare (CW), alcohol and other drugs (AOD), and court organizations shows promise in addressing the many needs of CW-involved families experiencing parental substance use disorders (SUDs). Research has suggested that differing perceptions of parents with SUDs among staff in these organizations may hinder the collaborative process. Using a sequential explanatory mixed-method approach, this study explored staff perceptions of parental SUDs among CW, AOD, and court organizations. Logistic regression analyses indicated that, compared to CW respondents, AOD respondents were: (a) less likely to believe that parents could provide effective parenting; (b) more likely to believe that abstinence should be a criterion for reunification; (c) more likely to agree that parents should receive jail time as a consequence for noncompliance with court orders; and (d) more likely to believe that parents could succeed in treatment. Thematic analyses of these focal areas identified two core themes (focus on the primary client and mandated time frames for permanency), as well as multiple subthemes, that provided a nuanced understanding of differing perceptions on these matters. Suggestions for the development of anticipatory cross-system training and practices and implications for policy evaluation are discussed. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0145-2134 1873-7757 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.020 |