In-home family-focused reunification: A six-year follow-up of a successful experiment

Social Work Research

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 205-214

  Walton, Elaine ^a  

^a BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Family preservation services; Long term effects; Longitudinal study; Out of home placement; Reunification

Indexed keywords

EID: 0013448965     PISSN: 10705309     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/swr/22.4.205     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Auclaire, P., & Schwartz, I. M. (1986). An evaluation of the effectiveness of intensive home-based services as an alternative to placement for adolescents and their families. Minneapolis: Hennepin County Community Services Department and the University of Minnesota, Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs.
2. Barth, R., Berrick, J. K., & Gilbert, N. (1994). Foster care caseload dynamics. In R. Barth, J. K. Berrick, & N. Gilbert (Eds.), Child welfare research review (Vol. 1, pp. 123-125). New York: Columbia University Press.
3. Callister, J. P., Mitchell, L., & Tolley, G. (1986). Profiling family preservation in Utah. Children Today, 15, 23-25, 36-37.
4. Feldman, L. H. (1991). Assessing the effectiveness of family preservation services in New Jersey within an ecological context. Trenton: New Jersey Department of Human Services, Division of Youth and Family Services.
5. Fraser, M. W., Nelson, K. E., & Rivard, J. C. (1997). Effectiveness of family preservation services. Social Work Research, 21, 138-153.
6. Fraser, M. W., Pecora, P. J., & Haapala, D. A. (1991). Families in crisis: Findings from the family-based intensive treatment project. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
7. Fraser, M. W., Walton, E., Lewis, R. E., Pecora, P. J., & Walton, W. K. (1996). An experiment in family reunification: Correlates of outcomes at one-year follow-up. Children and Youth Services Review, 18, 335-361.
8. Gelles, R. J. (1993). Family reunification/family preservation, are children really being protected? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8, 557-562.
9. Gillespie, J. M., Byrne, B., & Workman, L. J. (1995). An intensive reunification program for children in foster care. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 12, 213-228.
10. Goerge, R. M. (1990). The reunification process in substitute care. Social Service Review, 64, 422-457.
11. Goerge, R. M. (1994). The effect of public child welfare worker characteristics and turnover on discharge from foster care. In R. Barth, J. D. Berrick, & N. Gilbert (Eds.), Child welfare research review (Vol. 1, pp. 205-217). New York: Columbia University Press.
12. Henggeler, S. W., Melton, G. B., & Smith, L. A. (1992). Family preservation using multisystemic therapy: An effective alternative to incarcerating serious juvenile offenders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 953-961.
13. Kinney, J. M., Haapala, D. A., & Booth, C. (1991). Keeping families together: The Homebuilders model. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
14. Lantz, B. K. (1985). Keeping troubled teens at home. Children Today, 14, 9-12.
15. Lewis, R. E. (1994). Application and adaptation of intensive family preservation services to use for the reunification of foster children with their biological parents. Children and Youth Services Review, 16, 339-361.
16. Lewis, R. E., Walton, E., & Fraser, M. W. (1995). Examining family reunification services: A process analysis of a successful experiment. Research on Social Work Practice, 5, 259-282.
17. Maluccio, A. N., Abramczyk, L. W., & Thomlison, B. (Eds.). (1996). Special issue on family reunification of children in out-of-home care: Research issues and perspectives. Children and Youth Services Review, 18(4/5).
18. Nelson, K. E., & Landsman, M. J. (1992). Alternative models of family preservation: Family-based services in context. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
19. Rossi, P. H. (1992). Strategies for evaluation. Children and Youth Services Review (Special issue: Reforming child welfare through demonstration and evaluation), 14, 167-191.
20. Thomlison, B., & Krysik, J. (1993). Restrictiveness as a placement outcome indicator: A case-level example. Social Work Research, 18, 28-32.
21. Walton, E. (1991). The reunification of children with their families: A test of intensive services following out-of-home placement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
22. Walton, E. (1997). Enhancing investigative decisions in child welfare: An exploratory use of intensive family preservation services. Child Welfare, 76, 447-461.
23. Walton, E., Fraser, M. W., Lewis, R. E., Pecora, P. J., & Walton, W. K. (1993). In-home family-focused reunification: An experimental study. Child Welfare, 72, 473-487.
24. Wells, K. (1994). A reorientation to knowledge development in family preservation services: A proposal. Child Welfare, 73, 475-488.
25. Wells, K., & Biegel, D. E. (1992). Intensive family preservation services research: Current status and future agenda. Social Work Research & Abstracts 28(1), 21-27.
26. Wells, K., & Tracy, E. (1996). Reorienting intensive family preservation services in relation to public child welfare practice. Child Welfare, 75, 667-692.
27. Wulczyn, F. (1991). Caseload dynamics and foster care reentry. Social Service Review, 65, 133-156.
28. Wulczyn, F. (1994). Status at birth and infant placements in New York City. In R. Barth, J. D. Berrick, & N. Gilbert (Eds.), Child welfare research review (Vol. 1, pp. 146-184). New York: Columbia University Press.