Context. June Thoburn’s cross-national comparison of the main trends in child protection noted that in France there are less children who are fostered by family or friends than in most other countries (Thoburn J., 2007, p.... [ view full abstract ]
Context.
June Thoburn’s cross-national comparison of the main trends in child protection noted that in France there are less children who are fostered by family or friends than in most other countries (Thoburn J., 2007, p. 30). This paper examine the quantitative data available on formal kinship care in the North area (Département du Nord 59). This paper is a part of a study founded by ONED.
Aim
In France, children in kinship care are mostly living in their extended family. Sometimes the relatives close to the biological parents, are designated by the judge as “tiers digne de confiance” (reliable family). In some cases, the judge requests an additional educational intervention at home (EIAH)- called in French AEMO (Aide Educative en Milieu Ouvert) - to establish the new relationship between the child, the kin-carer and the parents. What are the main features of children in kinship care without educational intervention at home in comparison with children in kinship care with an additional educational intervention? Sarah Mosca’s PhD focuses on kinship care with EIAH. This paper allows to draw a wider frame for her qualitative research.
Method. In collaboration with the local authorities, we highlight the features of these two types of formal kinship care (Kinship with or without EIAH), thanks to the anonymous data base of children in formal kinship care, registered on December 31th, 2014.
Results and outcomes.
What are the data available on this topic in France? Have they changed since June Thoburn’s report?
The last national counting available on Decembre 31th, 2013 confirms this number: 6,8% of the children in care are in kinship care in France (Drees 2015, Serie stat 196, tab8.ase). In the two départements of our area Nord – Pas-de-Calais: among the 18 581 children in care, 8 900 children are in kinship care (6,6% in Nord, 4,4% in Pas-de-Calais).
Base on the 870 children in formal kinship care in the North department on December 31th, 2014, we show the differences between kinship care without EIAH and with EIAH regarding the sex of the child, the age of the child on December 31th, 2014., the age of the child at the first child protection intervention, the nature of the first intervention, the allowance received or not by the kin-carer.
A complementary information on the movements of children entering and leaving formal kinship care are compared to the incoming and outgoing flows of children followed by child protection in this area.
Conclusion.
In next months, we hope to compare more deeply the features of kinship care with those of all children in out-of-home care in the same area. Nevertheless this first collaboration gives us a clear view of the difference between kinship with or without EIAH.
References
Farmer E., Moyers S. (2008), Kinship Care. Fostering effective family and friends placement, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London.
Sellenet C., L’Houssni M., Perrot D., Calame G. (2013). Solidarités autour d’un enfant ; l’accueil dans la parentèle ou chez des tiers dignes de confiance en protection de l’enfant. Rapport pour le Défenseur des Droits, 106 pages.
Selwyn J., Nandy S. (2014). Kinship care un UK : using census date to estimate the extent of formal and informal care by relatives. Child and Family Social Work, 19, p. 44-54.
Thoburn J. (2007), Globalisation and Child Welfare : Some Lessons from a Cross-National Study of Children in Out-of-Home Care, University of East Anglia, Norwich.
Tillard B., Mosca S. (2015). Enfants confiés à un proche dans le cadre de la protection de l’enfance. Rapport intermédiaire à l’ONED, 31 juillet 2015, 57 p.
