Family unity meetings: Decision making and placement outcomes

Journal of Family Social Work

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 23-43

  Jones, Loring P ^a   Finnegan, Daniel ^a  

^a SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Child protective services; Child welfare; Family reunification; Permanency

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248603713     PISSN: 10522158     EISSN: 15404072     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1300/J039v07n04_02     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. American Humane Association. 1998. Review of the Research on Family Group decision Making. Protecting Children., 14(4):31–37.
2. Bailey, C., 1997. The real truth about the diversion project. Juvenile and Family Justice Today., 5(4):6–8.
3. Bartholet, E., 1999. quoted in Shirk, M. New Zealand Social Work Tactic Hits Shore, Makes Waves. Youth Today., 8(9):1–22. 18
4. Burford, G., Pennel, J., MacLeod, S., Campbell, S., and Lyall, G., 1996. Reunification as an extended family matter. Community Alternatives., 8(2):33–55.
5. Burford, G., and Pennel, J., 1996. Family Group Decision Making:Generating Indigenous Structures for Resolving Family Violence. Protecting Children., 12(3):17–21.
6. Cardi, M., Ryan, S., and Troutman, B., 2000. The Effects of Foster Care Placement on Young Children's Mental Health. Protecting Children., 16(1):30–34.
7. Charles, G., and Matheson, J., 1999. Children in Foster Care:Issues of Separation and Attachment. Community Alternatives, The International Journal of Family Care., 2(2):37–49.
8. Connoly, M., and McKenzie, M., 1999. Effective Participatory Practice, Family Group Conferencing in Child Protection New York:Aldine de Gruyter.
9. Davis, I. P., English, D. J., and Landsverk, J. A., 1995. Outcomes of Permanency Planning for 1165 Foster Children. A Study Supported by Federal Grant #90CW1075 to SDSU School of Social Work in Collaboration with Washington State Children, Youth, and Family Services and San Diego County Department of Social Services. Funding Period:September 30, 1992, to December 31, 1994
10. Dyskstra, C., 1996. Native American Update:Implementing the Family Unity Model in one Tribal American Community. Protecting Children., 12(3):28–29.
11. Fanshel, D., 1982. On the Road to Permanency:An Expanded Data Base for Service to Children in Foster Care. New York:CWLA.
12. Fisher, K., 1998. Family Conference Model:Santa Clara Denver, CO:American Humane Association.
13. Gelles, R., and Shirk, M., 1999. New Zealand Social Work Tactic Hits Shore, Makes Waves. Youth Today., 8(9):1–22. 18
14. Harper, C., and Coburn, N., 1998. Family Group Decision Making Technical Assistance Notebook. Englewood, CO:American Humane Association.
15. Hassall, I., 1996. “Origin and development of family group conferences”. In Family Group Conferences:Perspectives on policy and practice Edited by:Hudson, J., Morris, A., Maxwell, G., and Galaway, B., 17–36. Monsey, N.Y.O Willow Tree Press.
16. Hunter College School of Social Work. 1998, September 30. Tool #2:Family Group Decision Making New York:Hunter College, School of Social Work, National Resource Center for Permanency Planning.
17. Jones, L., Gross, E., and Becker, I., 2002. Characteristics of Domestic Violence Victims in a Child Protective Caseload. Families in Society, 83(4):405–409.
18. Lahti, J., 1982. “A follow-up study of foster children in permanent placements.”. In Social Service Review 556–571.
19. Lupton, C., and Stevens, M., 1998. Family Group Conferencing:The U.K. experience. Interdisciplinary Report on At-risk Children and Families., 1(2):21–31.
20. Lupton, C., 1998. Use of empowerment of family self-reliance. British Journal of Social Work., 28(1):107–128.
21. Marsh, P., 1998. Studies of family group conferences in England and Wales. Protecting Children., 4(4):32–33.
22. McDonald, W., 1998, May. The Santa Clara County Family Conference Model, Year 1 Process Evaluation Report. California:Sacramento. &Associates
23. Merkel-Holguin, L., 1996. Putting families back into the child protection partnership:Family group decision making. Protecting Children., 12(3):1996
24. Merkel-Holguin, L., Winterfield, A., Harper, C., Coburn, N., and Fluke, J., 1997. Innovations for Children's Services for the 21st Century:Family Group Decision Making and Patch. Englewood, CO:American Humane Association.
25. Merkel, L., 2000. Diversions and implementations of family group decision making in the United States Unpublished manuscript.
26. Mills, C., and Usher, D., 1996. A Kinship care case management approach. Child Welfare., 75(5):600–618.
27. Nice, J. L., and Graber, L. B., 1999. Family Unity Model Oregon:Author.
28. Pennell, J., and Burford, G., 2000. Family group decision making:Protecting children and women. Child Welfare., 79(2):131–158.
29. Pennell, J., and Burford, G., 1998. Family Group Decision Making:After the conference progress in resolving violence and promoting well-being. Protecting Children., 14(4):31
30. Rockhill, A., and Rodgers, A., 1998. The “who, what, and how” of making decisions in family unity meetings Denver, CO:American Humane Association.
31. United States Department of Health and Human Services. 2001. 10 Years Child Maltreatment. Washington, D. C:Administration on Children Youth and Families.
32. Walker, H., 1996. Whannau Hui, Family Decision Making, and the family group conference. Protecting Children., 12(3):8–10.
33. Welty, K., 1997. “Family Group Decision Making:Implications for Permanency Planning.”. In Adoptalk. 5–7. Spring