In Quebec, since 2007, an increase in the use of kinship care in comparison with other forms of placement has been observed to the extent that now almost one in three children removed from their homes are placed in this type... [ view full abstract ]
In Quebec, since 2007, an increase in the use of kinship care in comparison with other forms of placement has been observed to the extent that now almost one in three children removed from their homes are placed in this type of foster family. Current research indicates that kinship care tends to be more stable than placement in regular foster families (Farmer 2010; Koh et Testa, 2008 ; Oneill et al., 2008,). Nevertheless, according to a recent Quebec study, Hélie, Turcotte and Turcotte (2015) observed that compared to children placed in family foster care, those who are placed in kinship care are more likely to have their placement taking place and terminating during the investigation process, before any further ongoing services be provided. This observation brings attention to an aspect of kinship care that, to this point, has received little scholarly consideration – its use as a short term rather than longer term resource for out-of-home placement. The aim of this presentation is to provide a portrait of children placed in kinship care in Quebec and to explore the role of short term kinship care within the overall trajectory of protective interventions. Methodological aspects : The findings to be presented are drawn from an ongoing study involving a 170 children (0-12 years), who were placed in kinship care. The longitudinal follow up of these situations will allow for the documentation of the stability of the placement trajectory as well as of the particular characteristics of the child, his/her home environment, and those of his/her kinship environment. Research data is collected through a review of administrative records as well as through two short telephone interviews with the social workers responsible for each child. The first interview takes place at the beginning of the placement and the second at its termination. The collected data documents, amongst other things, the motives and circumstances surrounding the beginning and end of the placement; the support offered to the biological parents and the substitute carers; the frequency of contacts between the child and his/her biological parents and the the overall progress of the child throughout the placement. Preliminary descriptive analyses provide a detailed portrait of the children (N=170) involved in the study. For example, it has been noted that the majority of children (65%) were removed from their homes due to neglect; almost half (42%) have a brother or sister who was also placed in kinship care; in more than two thirds of the cases (69%), the placement was initiated during the period of investigation. At the time of initial placement, children were predominantly living in the care of their family of origin (75%). Of the remaining, children were residing in a formal out-of-home placement (14%); in another kinship family (6%) and 5% had been placed from hospital following their birth. Children were entrusted to a grandparent or a great grandparent (46%); to an uncle or an aunt (29%), to another member of family such as an adult brother or sister (9%), or to a member of the child’s family circle (15%). Later analyses will provide a detailed exploration of the role of kinship care within the trajectory of service for a subgroup of children for whom placement had ended at the moment of processing the data (24 months at least). After a 18 months follow up, 81 children had already left their kinship family to return to: their family of origin (n=51), to another kinship home (n=9), or to another out-of-home resource (n=21). Analysis will enable the identification of variables associated with these different routes out of kinship care.
