Free Newsletter
| An Assessment of Child Welfare Practices Regarding Fathers |
|
|
|
A report prepared by the National Family Preservation Network for The Annie E. Casey Foundation March 2001 BackgroundHistorically, most societies across the globe have been patriarchal, thereby giving the father the primary financial and moral obligation of raising his children. These realities have changed, slowly but surely, over the last one hundred and fifty years in our country. Today, 25 million children are being raised in fatherless households. How did this transition occur? Missouri was the first state in the Union to legislate a mother’s pension, the precursor to AFDC, in 1911. The mother’s pension provided for married women and their children who were without a male head of household, through no fault of their own. By 1932, all but three states had passed similar legislation. In 1935, the Federal Government created Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), the first federal welfare program.1 Formalization of the social welfare and child welfare systems throughout the Twentieth Century too often transferred the responsibility of caring for children from impoverished or otherwise fragile families from non-government institutions to government control. AFDC also worked to effectively eliminate fathers from families of the poor with policies that clearly stated that recipients must be single parents. AFDC recipients who were “caught” with a man (during the infamous midnight raids) were sanctioned with removal of benefits. These policies and procedures worked to solidify the single unmarried mother and her children as the primary beneficiaries of social welfare programs. Out-of-wedlock births skyrocketed during this time frame. The tremendous increase in the divorce rate in the United States over the last forty years has also dramatically added to the numbers of children being raised in single parent households. As such, we now have millions of children being raised not by their father and mother, but by their mother.2 For far too many children, their father has become a small or invisible part of their lives. The National Family Preservation Network (NFPN) believes that whenever possible, children should be raised within their own family. Research confirms that children fare better when they are raised by both parents. Yet for far too many children involved in the child welfare system, little effort is made to engage and involve their fathers either in their lives or in the decisions made for them. The NFPN seeks to raise awareness of the importance of fathers in children’s lives and to enhance the efforts of the child welfare system to include fathers and paternal kin as resources both in policy and in practice. PurposeThe National Family Preservation Network received a grant from the Annie E. Casey Foundation to review current child welfare practices to determine the extent to which fathers are engaged and involved in their children’s lives. Persons employed in public child welfare agencies, along with persons employed in fatherhood programs, faith based organizations and community based agencies serving families were invited to participate in this process. Their comments resulted in this report which identifies a number of striking concerns pertinent to fatherhood issues in the child welfare system. It is our hope that one outcome of this report will be the development of a fatherhood training curriculum for use within the child welfare system. This report seeks to serve as a wake up call to the child welfare system, to rethink their perception of their client family, not as being just a single mother and her children but including the father. It is true that a certain percentage of fathers do not play a role in their child’s life; however this figure actually represents only about one third of all families. An additional 25–33 percent of fathers do try to remain active in their child’s life but often encounter many obstacles that can prevent them from fulfilling their role as fathers. The remaining third of fathers do in fact remain a part of their child’s life.3 We are then faced with research and statistics that point to a sizable pool (two-thirds of all families) within the child welfare system who do in fact have fathers accessible to some degree, who could become involved in their children’s lives. Positively engaging these fathers and helping them to successfully overcome the barriers they face in their lives can in fact increase their willingness and ability to meet their parenting responsibilities. The child welfare system is not utilizing a precious resource available to them to meet the needs of children who become involved in their system of care. MethodologyNFPN had originally intended to conduct group discussions (also known as focus groups) in four targeted areas: Newark, New Jersey; St. Louis, Missouri; Indianapolis, Indiana; and Baltimore, Maryland. It was not possible to schedule a meeting in Baltimore and the site was replaced with a meeting in Washington, D.C. Trenton, New Jersey was added as a fifth group discussion to increase the participation of persons not able to attend the Newark, New Jersey meeting. Group discussions were selected by NFPN as the most appropriate method to assess training needs from an available pool of twelve training needs assessment methods. Newstrom and Lilyquist (1979) rate group discussion as a method which rates positively in five important areas: employee and management involvement, time requirement, cost and collection of relevant quantifiable data.4 Other available assessment methods did not score as well across all five areas. A list of questions was given to all group discussion participants to help focus their remarks. Employees from the local Child Welfare system, family preservation and family based programs, court personnel and staff employed in fatherhood programs were invited to participate in the group discussions. A total of 100 persons attended the meetings held in the five sites. Participant comments were recorded and summarized within the body of this report. FindingsGroup discussion participants were quite candid and surprisingly unanimous in their responses to the questions presented to them for discussion. Each group was asked to use the list of questions to “stimulate their thoughts”. Participants were told that it was not expected that the group would be structured to answer each question in sequence and then move on to the next question. The facilitator for the group discussions made the decision to keep the sessions loosely structured as her experience has found this format to yield the most candid, spontaneous, and pertinent comments. For the reader of this report, the comments have been organized around each of the questions answered, as well as other areas which emerged in conversation during the group discussions. How have you been able to successfully engage fathers? What specific knowledge and skills are needed? What implications are there for training other workers?Participants were unanimous in their statements and beliefs that the use of outreach and “non-traditional” services is needed to successfully engage fathers. For example, holding a sports night, having a family dinner, having open hours to use work-out equipment will bring fathers in. One participant spoke of a fatherhood program where the worker had a black belt in karate. The guys would practice karate and learn about being a better father, health issues, and being a more responsible man. Another program working with teen fathers was held in a gym. The guys would work out together and then have pizza afterwards. It was during the pizza dinners that the work of talking about responsible fatherhood would occur. One person spoke about hanging out at a local barber shop and engaging fathers there. Being on call 24/7 was seen as demonstrating a real commitment to working with people. Sending letters, a typical strategy used by the child welfare system to communicate with clients, was repeatedly reported to be an ineffective method to engage and communicate with fathers. Letters, especially those sent by a government agency, are perceived negatively and are generally not read by our client population. “Letters do not work to bring fathers into our services.” Participants stated that men are very distrustful of the social welfare system, which refers to them as “deadbeat dads,” “alleged father,” “alleged perpetrator.” The “midnight raids have not been forgotten,” stated one participant. Too many men feel that they are only being pursued in order to make child support payments. “Coming forward” as a dad is often perceived as a frightening and overwhelming act. Participants shared stories in which the child welfare and family court systems “beat up” dads who did come forward by highlighting their failure to provide for their children, threatening jail for failure to make child support payments, and accusing them of abuse or neglect of their child. These experiences solidified for too many men that even trying to be a good dad can have unpredictable and negative consequences. These practices would need dramatic changes. Other participants spoke about the importance of having to first address the father’s most pressing needs—not yours. Participants stated that social work teaches us to start where the client is. Often a father may say he needs to get a driver’s license or he needs legal assistance. “Start there and then you can move to the other issues once you gain his trust.” Participants who have been successful with fathers stated that it was important to help fathers meet their own needs first and then keep them going in the right direction. “We do whatever is needed to help these guys get what they need to be good fathers.” Sometimes it takes more than once to get it right. Agencies need to be sensitive to the reality that progress is often not a straight line forward—most people take two steps forward and one step back. This means men may need to repeat participation in a program if they were not able to successfully finish it the first time it was offered to them. “No one ever took care of these men when they were children. Take the time to listen, meet their needs and point them in the right direction. Do this and they will start to be able to do for themselves. And then, and only then, will they be able to become better fathers.” Participants spoke about the need to acknowledge each father’s individual hardships and to provide him with the services he needs to be a better father (i.e., job training, housing, employment referrals). Fathers also need help creating quality time with their children. Agencies interested in engaging fathers need to sponsor activities, i.e., family dinners, making crafts or wood work projects together, field trips, movies, family game nights. This is critically important as many men did not have the experience of “play time” with their own fathers and need to be taught how to play with their children. Participants felt that bonding and attachment evaluations conducted by child welfare staff who would be able to access these sessions would enable understanding a father’s attachment to his child much better than a sterile, formal evaluation. Participants stated that child welfare workers need to change their thinking about fathers and begin to assume that fathers want to be involved. This was an important theme and would represent a significant change in practice in child welfare. Workers need to clarify for the father that his absence means other people will make decisions concerning his child without his input. “Invisible fathers” need to be identified and brought in early in the intervention. Participants stressed the importance of asking the child directly about his/her father—he/she will often have lots to tell you. Regarding the knowledge and skills needed to engage fathers, participants were quite united in the need to speak to fathers with dignity and respect. One participant, a man, stated that too many workers don’t have an understanding of the relational style of boys and men. “Workers need to employ a more psycho-educational approach—give them options, show them a video, and let them ask questions. Don’t expect them to search their souls and share a lot of feelings.” How questions are asked is also a critical component of engaging fathers. The tone of voice workers use can determine whether the father will feel respected or blamed. Workers need to really listen in a respectful manner. Participants stated that so many workers think they do this but they don’t. They stated that workers’ nonverbal behaviors also go a long way in either communicating respect or a lack of respect. Participants stressed that child welfare workers need training in these areas to help “get communication right” between fathers and workers. This is an important training area. One participant clarified that many men use anger to cover up more vulnerable feelings. Child welfare staff are often intimidated by this display of anger and tend to shy away from working with fathers. Child welfare workers need to be trained to be more aware of men’s communication styles and to be able to get underneath the anger and get to the more honest feelings. Participants successful in working with men stated that you have to get “underneath” their “attitude.” They stated that men use this attitude quite successfully to keep people out (like child welfare workers) and to hide their true feelings from people. It was said that workers need to listen non-judgmentally to fathers. “That may mean screening out the curse words, don’t listen to the curse words, listen to what they are really saying—often the message is there but you really have to listen for it.” Workers also need to ask, not tell. Participants stressed the importance of being solution focused, not problem centered. Child welfare workers need to see mothers, fathers and themselves as a team working together to strengthen families. Too many workers, they stated, still see the father as the enemy and treat him like one. Workers need to empower fathers and play a role in helping fathers to become a more active part of their children’s lives. Participants cited too many negative interfaces with helping professionals who have blamed the father for his inadequacies and isolated him from their services. Participants spoke about the need to give fathers unconditional acceptance, lots of nurturance, good food, warm places to meet, concrete and emotional assistance, positive male role models to mentor them and help these men forward in achieving their goals. Fathers need help to become their own personal heroes by making a personal goal plan and then providing them with whatever it takes to help them make that plan a reality. One fatherhood program offers a stipend for participation in their five week program, which pays more than unemployment. The program also provides security deposits for apartments that are used as a “carrot” for a clean urine sample, or completing a job training program. Men “need to feel like they belong to a group—look at the success of gangs with young men,” stated one participant. Social services need to use that same psychology but in a positive direction. What is the percentage of two-parent families versus one-parent families in your caseload? How many fathers have you served? What is the nature/type and duration of these services? Did you provide services not traditionally offered by your program/agency?One child welfare worker, who has been employed for 24 years, stated, “We don’t involve fathers, the system is mother-focused.” Another worker with 11 years in child welfare stated that there has been only one family she has worked with where the father was involved and it was a family where the mother had severe mental health issues. A participant who worked for child welfare stated that she had a caseload of fifty or sixty families and there were no fathers. A home based worker commented that he currently has a caseload of 16 families and only one had a father. In this family the father was the primary caretaker. He stated that the child welfare worker involved with this family had “to face her biases about a father being the sole caretaker of young children. Yet the father was doing it, taking care of four children, two who were under the age of four. He needed help but he knew how to ask for help and he worked very hard to be a good father and parent to the four children. It wasn’t easy for him though when reaching out to service providers who had negative perceptions of his ability to raise his children.” The worker served as his advocate to get him help from others. “So many people hint that a single dad can’t take care of their children, but it’s just not true.” “Cultural issues are also very important,” commented several participants. They stated you “have to understand gender roles in different cultures so you know how to address the father and the mother.” One participant stated that he “had a family shut down on me because I made the mistake of addressing the mother first when what I should have done was to first recognize the father as the head of the household.” Another participant felt that it was important for child welfare workers to be plugged into their community. She gave one example of “Mother’s day.” The participant went on to inform the group that “Mother’s day” is the first day of the month when the welfare checks come out. She said that this “is still a reality in Indianapolis for many families. The father comes by, the family goes out to dinner and the kids get new shoes or a haircut. It is practices like this that demonstrate how the system continues to reinforce single, female-headed families.” What role does a mother have in influencing the father’s relationship or involvement with his child? Do you think bearing children out of wedlock complicates the nature of the father’s relationship with the children when the parents’ relationship breaks up? What can help address the issue of shared parenting when two parents are no longer partners?One participant, a child welfare worker, stated, “If the mother says the father is dead, we stop right there. It quite simply is easier than trying to locate the father, especially if we feel the mom will not be cooperative.” Participants clearly stated that mothers are the gatekeepers to locating and involving fathers. This reality was echoed by all of the participants in the group discussions. They stated that many mothers often know where the father of their children lives. Participants stated that these “invisible fathers” are reachable if you can engage the mother, obtain her trust, and help her believe that she and her children can benefit from the father taking a more active role in their children’s lives. Participants at the different meetings echoed that mothers play a critical role in getting fathers involved. Other participants talked about the importance of a young mother’s own mother. This grandmother represents another important gatekeeper as she often influences whether or not the baby’s father will be allowed to have contact with his child. Child welfare workers need training that allows them to be able to talk to a mother, draw her out, and help her to talk about her child’s father. Moms need to learn and understand the benefits of having fathers involved in their children’s lives. One participant stated that “this is so important. So often I work with boys who say they don’t want to see their dads ’cause their moms have brainwashed them that dad is bad. This makes them feel bad about themselves too, since they will soon grow up and don’t have a positive role model to identify with as a grown man or as a father.” Participants stated that fathers are often available if we look for them and work to engage them. Mothers who initially say that they don’t know who the father is or say that the father is deceased will often come forth with who the father is and where he lives and what role he has had in the family. This points to a real training need for child welfare workers—to be able to engage mothers and help them appreciate the importance of a father to their child, to realize that she could also benefit from his assistance in helping to raise their child—not just financially but also emotionally. Participants also stated that bearing children out of wedlock gives mothers tremendous power and control over their children’s lives. Failure to legally establish paternity leaves the father without any legal recourse. “Moms have all the power in the courts.” One participant stated that the courts gave him a hard time when he sought custody of his daughter who had been living with her mother for nine years. He stated that he had always worked (in human services), always paid his child support on time, had never been on drugs, and did not have a criminal record. Yet the courts seemed distrustful of his motives for trying to gain custody of his daughter. Other workers stated that a father is much more likely to get custody of a son than a daughter. This bias is due to a fear of sexual abuse of the daughter by the father, even when there is nothing to suggest that this is an issue. Participants stated again and again that a father’s worthiness always seems to be in question—this type of hostile attitude is prevalent throughout child welfare and the court system and is a big turnoff to fathers. Participants also spoke about some fathers’ reluctance to visit with their children if they no longer have any type of (sexual) relationship with the mother. This is unfortunate and points to the need to have mothers and fathers realize the importance of their relationship with their child, independent of their relationship with one another. Participants stated that helping families of mothers whose children have multiple fathers represents a more complex outreach effort by child welfare workers. They stated that workers may often feel overwhelmed by time constraints, thereby failing to do what is needed to search out several different fathers. Has any of your previous training sensitized you to the needs of fathers? What about your schooling? Other influences? Own family of origin?Participants stated that child welfare training traditionally does not include any special emphasis on working with fathers. A child welfare worker, employed in the training unit of her agency, stated that involving the father is mentioned in new worker training but without any special emphasis. Child welfare workers present at the group discussions stated that the term parent is used and is understood by workers to almost always refer to the mother. Occasionally workers may find a special workshop concerning fathers available outside the agency and they can seek permission from their supervisor to attend. One child welfare worker stated that she has worked at her agency for 16 years and has had no training around fathers. Participants working in child welfare admitted that it is easier to work with families who are single mothers and children. “A father in the family makes it harder. Easier to let dad stay in the background and not deal with him, then I don’t have to deal with my own issues about men. It is easier to deal with mom only.” One participant who recently graduated with her bachelor’s degree in social work stated she never heard anything in social work school concerning fathers. Another participant, who teaches graduate school courses in social work at a state university, stated that there is nothing in the curriculum of the courses she has taught that specifically explores fathers. This includes classes such as Advanced Direct Practice with Children and Families at Risk and Advanced Direct Practice with Families. Participants again and again stated that family of origin issues play an enormous role in how professionals work with fathers. They stressed that although this is an extremely sensitive issue, somehow training must address this issue if services towards fathers are to change. Many female child welfare workers have negative experiences surrounding their own fathers or the fathers of their children. Personal biases and experiences can and do contaminate professional practice. Charles Ballard, the founder of the Institute of Responsible Fatherhood and Family Revitalization, considers it mandatory that his staff resolve their own issues regarding their father before they can work to reconnect fathers with their children and improve families’ lives. Mr. Ballard believes that their protégés (their term for client) must also resolve their issues with their own fathers before they can assume their roles as mothers and fathers and appropriately share that role with the other parent. How do agencies find out about fatherhood programs? What is the nature of their collaboration of services with Child Welfare and Family Preservation Services? Do you see any cross-training efforts happening here, why or why not?Child welfare agencies generally find out about fatherhood programs either by word of mouth or by a formal presentation the program might make at a staff meeting. One participant (working in a fatherhood program) stated that people (in child welfare) often talk about collaboration but fail to ever make any meaningful effort to collaborate with outside agencies. Participants cited that while they might know about a young fathers program (working primarily with teen fathers) they weren’t generally aware of other programs available to fathers, especially older fathers. Cross training is a real possibility and must be explored. Child welfare agencies could benefit tremendously from the knowledge and experience that fatherhood programs have to share with them. Fatherhood programs could represent an important “bridge” between themselves and more formal child welfare services. Fathers who have become involved with their children or raised their children as single parents would be terrific presenters to counter the negative stereotypes about fathers. Other resources, such as early head start centers, could serve as important collaborators in helping to get fathers involved in more formal services. What staffing patterns might encourage more participation by fathers?Women greatly outnumber men in the child welfare profession. Participants again and again talked about the need to have more men working in the field. Staff from fatherhood programs repeatedly talked about men needing other men to confide and trust in. One program even has a policy that female workers work with female clients and male workers work with male clients. They have found this to be a very successful strategy since people seem to open up more freely when speaking with someone of their own gender. More men are needed in child welfare, especially men of color. This is a pressing need for child welfare. Participants stated that too many issues (primarily those with sexual nuances) can emerge between men and women that contaminate a helping relationship between a young female worker and a male client. Participants commented that having young women working in child welfare is often difficult for fathers since they often feel the need to portray themselves as macho and cool in front of women their own age. One child welfare worker stated that her gray hair has really helped her to work with fathers. They see her more as a mother or grandmother and they are not so afraid to talk to her and share their real feelings. Another older woman, employed in a fatherhood program, is lovingly referred to as “Mama D.” This staff person reports that for many of the men, she is old enough to be perceived as “safe” and with that the men feel more comfortable in letting her be the mother they never really had. She is therefore able to tell them candidly they need to bathe, they need to wear clean clothes, they need to get off drugs, and then they will listen to her. Participants lamented that child welfare is an entry level job with low wages, rotten work and lots of turnover—people leave as soon as they get a little experience and can move on to a better job. Child Welfare as a system would need to improve working conditions and increase salaries to attract more men into the field. Several participants also talked about the need to hire persons who value two parent families and who grew up with both parents involved in their lives. What current (formal and informal) practices and policies exist in your agency that help to involve fathers in your work? What impact has ASFA had on father involvement?Participants could not cite any formal policies or practices that encourage participation by fathers other than exploring relatives for foster care placements and ASFA. One child welfare participant stated that ASFA has helped to increase both the fathers’ participation as well as that of the fathers’ families. The fact that ASFA requires reaching out more to fathers was cited by many participants. Others felt that while this was the official policy, it was not always acted upon by workers. “ASFA policy does not always translate into practice. Location of fathers is perceived as a complicated process that many workers quite frankly see as a time-consuming burden. Some workers do not even know how and who to contact to help them initiate a search for a missing father.” Failure to establish paternity or the mother’s reluctance to bring the father into the picture accounts for many fathers not being pursued, even with the ASFA requirements. Some workers stated that when fathers were present in the family they were not included in the case plans as being required to do anything. Several participants reported that the child welfare case record is always put in the mother’s name, even if the mother is deceased. A community agency that serves families referred from child welfare remarked that their referral form only had one line available to write a parent’s name. It is assumed that the one parent would be the mother. These practices sadly reinforce to workers the expectation that the father is not valued or needed in the role of parent for a child. How can we make services more father-friendly (outreach, staffing, availability during non-traditional hours, use of concrete services)? What policies and practices would you like to see enacted to involve more fathers in families?Participants stated that all of the areas mentioned in this question—more outreach, more male staff, services on nights and weekends, offering concrete services, would all help to engage more fathers. They also cited the need to offer services located outside of government buildings because of a general distrust of those buildings. Participants stated that men they have worked with have been arrested through undercover sting operations offering items such as free tickets to sports events, so they are generally suspicious of most government sponsored outreach efforts. Churches offer a terrific non-threatening place for men to meet, hang out, and participate in social activities with their children. Home based services are a must to engage fathers. One participant, speaking on the importance of fathers, spoke about a family he worked with. He stated that it was “well worth doing the extra work to get the father involved.” The family involved a mother and a 16-year-old girl with problems. The worker got the daughter reconnected to her father; this was a real issue for the girl and her grades improved as did her relationship with her mother. It was a great success, in large part due to getting the father reconnected to his daughter. Participants stated that involving the father begins at intake and continues throughout the case. One participant spoke of the importance of using ecomaps with families to find out about the whole family and its support systems. Paternity establishment was cited by many as needing to become a priority. Paternity should be established as early and as quickly as possible. Participants spoke about uncooperative hospitals and delays of many months in the system processing paternity papers. Participants also cited a need to provide a pass through of child support for women on welfare. Participants spoke of so many men they worked with who stated, “Why pay if she isn’t going to get any of the money?” Policies that currently use child support to reimburse TANF payments are perceived as unfair to many fathers paying child support. Workers need to be trained that fathers have the same legal rights as mothers as long as paternity has been legally established. This is not currently the perception by workers. One participant honestly admitted that “some workers are too lazy to look for fathers. It is more convenient to go along with the mother’s comments that she doesn’t know where the father is, even if it means putting the child into a non-relative foster care placement. Location of the father’s relatives can take too much time and often doesn’t pan out. It’s easier to just put them somewhere else.” But this practice results in tremendous loss for the child. Training needs to address the importance of family ties, especially during out-of-home placement. Participants lamented that current welfare reform efforts and funding have gone to employ mothers. What about the fathers? “Mothers got the job training and fathers got a bill for child support” was stated by more than one participant in the group discussions. Participants cited the Personal Responsibility Act which strengthened child support efforts but has not done what it could to help fathers gain viable employment. “This is a tragedy,” stated one participant. “If we want mothers and fathers to support their children then both must be offered vocational training in careers that provide a living wage to support a family.” Research supports the belief that men who have jobs with livable wages are more involved with their children. Services must help this become a reality. Participants cited a need for advocates to help fathers get through the system. This is especially true for migrant workers and other undocumented persons who need to know their rights before they will come forward as active fathers. One participant spoke of a program in Philadelphia family court where every father is assisted by a father advocate when he goes to court for child support. Participants thought that this was a terrific service and that fathers everywhere need some type of “father ombudsman” to guide them through both the child welfare and the court systems. Are there policies and practices which negatively influence or exclude fathers in your work? Any suggestions for how to overcome these barriers?Men are reluctant to go to court for visitation of their child if they can’t pay child support. Participants commented that in some states a father is not eligible to create a coparenting arrangement (which includes visitation) until his child support situation is resolved. Participants stated that the courts are very negative in their work with fathers—fathers are always scrutinized and made to prove their worthiness before custody will be considered. The current view of paternity establishment is perceived in a negative way by our client population. “Once a man is named a father he gets a letter to pay child support.” Participants cited a need to embrace fathers for more than just money. Participants stated that the courts will throw a father into jail if he can’t pay child support when they should be offering him job training and job placement services instead. It is these types of services that will truly help the father to pay child support, not putting him in jail. If a father is able to pay child support, he is more likely to be involved with his child. Child support enforcement dollars could be reduced (and redirected) if services were provided to help fathers get jobs. The time it takes to establish paternity was cited as a barrier. It takes too long to help child welfare workers use the father as a relative placement if paternity has not been previously established. Participants stated that establishing paternity can take 6–8 months and that’s too long to wait for a placement. Fathers who are out of state are seen as requiring too much work to try to locate them and go through what is needed to use them as potential relative placements. Homeless shelters for families normally only accept mothers and their children. Fathers are excluded. This policy and practice excludes fathers during a critical time in a family’s life. Child welfare needs access to shelters that will take in the whole family. Workers who are well meaning can also serve as a barrier to families. A participant shared a story about a family who went to apply for Section 8 housing. The worker there encouraged the mother not to claim the father as a member of their family because his minimum wage job would probably make them ineligible for the housing. This was a dilemma for the mother who was in a relationship with the father but also needed the housing. The worker told her that if she did not put the father on the lease that he could not live there. If he were caught living there she would lose her housing. What a dilemma for this client. She was in a real double bind—having the worker encourage her not to list her partner as a family member and having to live in fear if the housing authority found him in her home. What specific recommendations do you have to change the current practice of minimal involvement of fathers?Child welfare services have to nurture fathers and offer them the services they need to become empowered. Training has to change the negative mindset of workers, and participants expressed a frustration that this would take years to do. Workers need training in child and family development in order to appreciate the importance of a father in a child’s life. Workers also need formal policies written to counter and eliminate the informal policies and practices that continue to exclude fathers. Participants also cited a need to work with fathers in jail and in after-care jail programs. One participant spoke of a grant that kept incarcerated men connected to their children through letter writing campaigns and visitation. Too many men leave jail with a few dollars in their pocket, no place to go, and no family connections. Participants stated that inmates who are more connected to their children are more likely to want to make something of themselves once they leave jail. Services must be implemented to address this simple and important fact. Participants also stated that women’s jails often have visiting room for use with their children, but men’s jails don’t. “Men’s jails are a scary place for children to visit.” One participant talked about the Girl Scouts running a prison-based troop for girls whose mothers were incarcerated in a New Jersey prison. It was discussed as something to look into to see if Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts could replicate this model elsewhere. Participants cited a need to identify anti-father policies and practices, not only in the child welfare system, but also those others systems that directly impact child welfare such as family court, child support, etc. Participants also spoke about the system needing to address the policy of withholding custody if a parent has a criminal record. Participants cited a need to differentiate between different types of criminal records (ones involving injury of a person versus other types of crimes) when making custody decisions. While not the focus of the discussions, a huge issue affecting fatherhood is domestic violence. This issue should be thoroughly addressed by the child welfare system when implementing fatherhood policies and programs. More networking between child welfare and community based services is needed. This is especially true for agencies serving fathers. One participant who has worked in child welfare for 30 years was thrilled to attend the group discussion and hear about the existence of a number of fatherhood programs. She stated that this was the first time she heard about these programs and had she not attended, she would still be unaware of their existence or locations. Police also need training. One participant told a story of the police going to a house because a neighbor called to report their concerns about a domestic dispute. The father came to the door with the baby in his arms when the police arrived. The case was written up in the child welfare case record stating that the “police reported that the father was using the baby as a human shield.” The worker stated there were no guns or drugs in the house and that she felt the father was treated unfairly by the police and the child welfare workers who were called to the house. She was assigned the case and found a lot of strengths in the family. Pointing these strengths out to the family was a turning point in her efforts to be able to work with the family. “Too many professionals who work with families assume the worst and treat people in a negative, harsh manner. This needs to change.” RecommendationsHow then can the child welfare system create a more father-friendly and therefore a truly family-centered system?Participants were fairly unanimous in their comments about the dramatic changes that must occur in order to bring fathers back into their children’s lives. System Changes
Practice Changes
Training CurriculumThe National Family Preservation Network proposes to create a training curriculum designed to move the child welfare system towards a more father-friendly and a more family-centered system. The training curriculum will:
AcknowledgmentsThe National Family Preservation Network would like to thank the many agencies who participated in the group discussions, generously shared their knowledge, wisdom, feelings and hopes that provided us with the information needed to compile this report: Adult and Child Mental Health Services, Indianapolis, IN This report was prepared and written by Maureen Braun Scalera for the National Family Preservation Network. Appreciation is given to the Annie E. Casey Foundation whose support made this report possible.
References
|
||
| < Prev |
|---|