Objectives
Evaluation of a non-violent resistance intervention for foster parents caring for foster children with externalizing problem behaviour.
Method
Using restricted randomization (minimization), 62 out of 87 eligible foster parents of foster children (ages 6 – 18) with externalizing problem behaviour were assigned to an intervention (n = 31) and a treatment as usual control group (n = 31).
The intervention was a manualized adaptation of the NVR program for regular families (Van Holen, Vanderfaeillie, & Omer 2015). It includes ten home-sessions aimed at helping foster parents to prevent escalation, engage social support, use reconciliation gestures, and implement non-violent resistance to problem behaviors.
Foster mothers filled out a questionnaire prior to the start of the intervention (T0), immediately after the intervention (T1), and at follow-up three months later (T2).
Measures regarding behavioural problems (Child Behavior Checklist/6-18, Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001), parenting stress (Nijmeegse Vragenlijst voor de Opvoedingssituatie, Wels & Robbroeckx, 1996), parenting practices (Ghent Parental Behaviour Scale, Van Leeuwen & Vermulst, 2004), and the size of the supportive network were assessed.
Intention-to-treat and analysis of covariance were used to analyse outcomes.
Results
Regarding foster children’s behaviour problems, although comparison did not reach significance, small positive trends favouring the NVR group were reported on the total problems scale at treatment completion (d = .35) and on internalizing (d = .21), externalizing (d = .24) and total problems (d = .33) at follow-up. Regarding parenting stress small positive trends were found at treatment conclusion, increasing to medium sized effects at follow-up: foster mothers in the NVR group felt more able to cope (T1: d = .22; T2: d = .53), were more satisfied with the parenting situation (T1: d = .23; T2: d = .30), and reported less severe problems (T1: d = .35; T2: d = .70, p = .01). Regarding parenting practices, a significant small effect was found in parental monitoring at treatment conclusion (d = .28, p = .005) and a significant medium sized effect was found in inconsistent punishment at follow up (T1: d = .30; T2: d = .51, p = .03). Furthermore, small positive trends were found regarding positive parenting (d = .34) and setting rules (d = .29) at treatment conclusion and discipline at follow up (d = .29). Regarding support there were improvements both at treatment completion and at follow-up: foster mothers received more emotional support (T1: d = .31; T2: d = .72, p = .03), could count on more people to provide them with practical support (T1: d = .36; T2: d = .35, p = .09), and with information and advice (T1: d = 1.05; p = .01, T2: d = .72).
Conclusions
The intervention showed to be promising, leading to an increase in support and some changes in parenting stress and parenting practices. Further development of the intervention and future examination of the specific ingredients that might be important and effective are needed in order to increase its effectivity.
References
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Manual for the Aseba school-age forms & profiles: child behaviour checklist for ages 6-18. Burlington: ASEBA.
Van Holen, F., Vanderfaeillie, J., & Omer, H. (2015). Adaptation and evaluation of a nonviolent resistance intervention for foster parents: A progress report. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, doi: 10.1111/jmft.12125.
Van Leeuwen, K. G., & Vermulst, A. A. (2004). Some psychometric properties of the Ghent parental behavior scale. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 20, 283–298.
Wels, P. M. A., & Robbroeckx, L. M. H. (1996). Nijmeegse vragenlijst voor de opvoedingssituatie: Handleiding. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Family foster care and adoption , Program evaluation and quality in child welfare
