Family group conferencing: a participatory practise in families with children at risk

Ricardo

Ramos Gutiérrez

Initials:

Ricardo

ORCID:

DOI:https://doi.org/10.32061/RTS2023.224.02

Abstract

Within child protection work involving families with children at risk, the safety of said children has been traditionally prioritised over the stability of family ties, often leading to coercive and adversarial situations involving families which frequently lead to the child being taken away. The unsuccessful outcomes of these typical practices have given rise to a call for cooperation between professionals and families which must unfold in the form of specific interventions in order to go beyond simple rhetoric.

This paper examines one of these practices in detail: family group conferencing (in New Zealand), in which the abilities and wishes of families and their networks of ties were fostered. We also address anticipation dialogues (in Norway), which served as inspiration for family group conferencing to introduce components for triggering the child’s participation in matters that are highly important for their future.

These are practices that require institutional support and reorganisation to be implemented. However, we believe that it is worth becoming acquainted with them owing to their capacity to inspire and encourage change in the balance of power relations between professionals and service users. Despite taking on certain risks, these changes strive to deliver more effective and shared outcomes.

Keywords:

Child protection, resource model, family group conferencing, child perspective

Citation: Ramos Gutiérrez, Ricardo (2023). Family group conferencing: a participatory practise in families with children at risk. Revista de Treball Social, 224, 51-69. doi:https://doi.org/10.32061/RTS2023.224.02.

Bibliographic references:

American Humane Association. (2010). Guidelines for Family Group Decision Making in Child Welfare. Universtiy of Pittsburgh. Retrieved on 6 April 2023, from http://www.pacwrc.pitt.edu/Curriculum/207RemoteFGDMPart2/TableResources/TBLR01_GdlnsFrFmlyGrpDcsnMknginChldWlfre.pdf

Barnsdale Lee, and Walker, Moira. (2007). Examining the Use and Impact of Family Group Conferencing. Scottish Executive Education Department, Edimbourgh.

Berg Insoo Kim, and Kelly, Susan. (2000). Building Solutions in Child Protection Services. WW Norton & Company, New York-London.

Bredewold, Femmianne, and Tonkens, Evelien H. (2021). Understanding Successes and Failures in Family Group Conferencing: An In-Depth Multiple Case Study. British Journal of Social Work, 51(6), 2173-2190.

Connolly, Marie, and Mckenzie, Margaret. (1999). Effective Participatory Practice: Family Group Conferencing in Child Protection. Aldine de Gruyter Inc.

De Jong, Gideon, and Schout, Gert. (2011). Family Group Conferences in Mental Health Care: An Exploration of Opportunities. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 20, 63-74.

De Jong, Gideon; Schout, Gert, and Abma, Tineke. (2017). Understanding the Process of Family Group Conferencing in Public Mental Health Care. A multiple Case Study. British Journal of Social Work, 48(2), 1-18.

Eriksson, Esa, and Arknil, Tom Erik. (2009). Taking up One’s Worries. A Handbook on Early Dialogues. Gummerus Printing.

Frost, Nick, and Stein, Mike. (1989). The Politics of Child Welfare: Inequality, Power and Change. Harvester Wheatstheaf.

Heino, Tarja. (2009). Family Group Conference from a Child Perspective: Nordic Research Report. Gummerus Printing.

Holland, Sally, and Rivett, Mark. (2008). Everyone Started Shouting: Making the Connections between the Process in Family Group Conferences and Family Therapy Practice. British Journal of Social Work, 38(1), 21-38.

Katz, Mitchell H.; Hampton, Robert L.; Newberger, Eli H.; Bowles, Roy T., and Snider, Jane C. (1986). Returning Children Home: Clinical Decision Making in Cases of Child Abuse and Neglect. American Journal of Ortopsychiatry, 56(2), 253-262.

Kempe, Ruth. S., and Kempe, C. Henry. (1978). Child Abuse. Fontana Open Books.

Madsen, William C., and Gillespie, Kevin. (2014). Collaborative Helping: A Strengths Framework for Home-Based Services. Wiley.

Martín Hernández, Javier. (2009). Protección de menores: Una institución en crisis. Pirámide.

Merkel-Holguin, Lisa, and Wilmot, Leslie. (2004). Family Group Conferencing: Response to the Most Commonly Asked Questions. American Humane Association.

Metze, Rosalie; Abma, Tineke A., and Kwekkeboom, M. H. (2013). Family Group Conferencing: A Theoretical Underpinning. Health Care Analysis, 23, 2.

Ney, Tara; Stoltz Jo-Anne, and Maloney, Maureen. (2011). Voice, Power and Discourse: Experiences of FGC Participants in the Context of Child Protection. Journal of Social Work, 13(2), 184-202.

Pennell, Joan, and Burford, Gale. (2000). Family Group Decision Making: Protecting Children and Women. Child Welfare, 79(2), 131-158.

Ramos, Ricardo. (2021). La selva del maltrato: Caminos de ida, senderos de vuelta. Ed. Morata.

Ramos, Ricardo. (2022). Del caso al cambio: la red profesional, el acontecimiento y la apertura. Mosaico, 80, 75-84.

Seikkula, Jaakko, and Arnkil, Tom Erik. (2016). Diálogos terapéuticos en la red social. Herder.

Seikkula, Jaakko; Arnkil, Tom Erik, and Eriksson, Esa. (2003). Postmodern Society and Social Network: Open and Anticipation Dialogues in Network Meetings. Family Process, 42(2), 185-203.

Speck, Ross V., and Attneave, Carolyn L. (2000). Redes Familiares. Amorrortu.

Sundell, Knut, and Vinnerljung, Bo. (2004). Outcome of family group conferencing in Sweden: A 3-year follow-up. Child Abuse ang Neglect, 28(3), 267-287.

Thoburn, June; Wilding, Jennifer, y Watson, Jackie. (2000). Family Support in Cases of Emotional Maltreatment and Neglect. The Stationary Office.

Turnell, Andrew, and Edwards, Steve. (1999). Signs of Safety. W. W. Norton & Company.

224

Article

Family group conferencing: a participatory practise in families with children at risk

June 2023

More viewed article

Tags