Kinship care refers to the placement of children within the child welfare system with family members or others who have a significant relationship with the children. This term was created when the child welfare system began to formalize family foster care. Historically, families have been the primary source of caring for children when the custodial parent was unable to be the primary caregiver. When biological relatives were unavailable, many communities had informal systems in place to care for children that involved religious community members, neighbors, or friends.
Historical Perspective
Prior to the advent of formal, government run child welfare systems, communities and families responded to children in need. This response was true both in cities and in rural communities as well as in indigenous communities throughout the United States. In many incidents, an informal system through religious organizations was created to care for children in need. Government was much less involved in families’ lives, and the responsibility for children tended to rest within the community. In late 19th century America, the need for assistance in dealing with abandoned or orphaned children was growing, and pressure was put on both state and federal government to create solutions for their care. A formal child welfare system began to be created through the actions of individual states, initially with little federal government involvement. This historical legacy still holds true today, with differing processes and regulations ascribed to foster care dependent on state parameters.
Informal care networks were in place due to the absence of a government system. In addition, many cultures have an inherent value of multiple primary caregivers for children. In Native American languages, it is very common to have the same word for mother refer to aunts. The same can be said for father and uncle. Within these cultures, the creation of a government run foster care system that utilized trained strangers may have actually created harm and dislocation for these communities. Many in the Native American communities and the African American communities feel they have been victimized by the government run foster care structure.
The last 30 years of the 20th century brought the formalized foster care debate to the forefront. Native Americans along with other minority communities began to speak out about their children being placed in foster homes of other races and cultures. In 1978, the U.S. government passed the Indian Child Welfare Act in which one of the principal tenets was that Native American children must be placed with their family or with their tribal communities. Child welfare practice began to also focus on children of color, and it became standard social work practice to place minority children in minority homes. This philosophy carried through to adoptive homes selection and resulted in large numbers of children of color waiting for minority homes for both foster care and adoption.
The U.S. Congress addressed the “waiting children” issue in 1997, bypassing legislation making identification of race in placing children in the child welfare system against the law. This legislation does not affect those Native American children covered under the Indian Child Welfare Act, where family and tribal home placements are required. Congress further legislated in the 1990s the need for child welfare systems to find and assess family and kin for child placements. Thus, states began to create processes for relative and kinship searching for the children in the child welfare system as well as strategies for licensure.
Current Practices in Government
Since the child welfare system is a joint regulation between the federal and state government, kinship foster care’s structure is unique to each locality. By the very nature of the label foster care, kin placements are usually licensed (assessed and/or regulated) in some fashion and often paid. Some states have a separate process for kinship foster care with differing license requirements and separate payment schemes. Some states offer no separate payment and require families caring for children to apply for a “relative only” welfare payment. Still others have incorporated the kinship foster care into their state run foster care system with the same licensing requirements and the same payment schemes as any other foster care situation.
States with Separate Schemes
States with separate processes and payment schemes tend to have capped budgetary restraints with these relative care payments. These systems usually run out of payment monies prior to the end of a budget cycle. These systems tend to have less regulation when it comes to licensing of homes; therefore, designated kin do not need to adhere to the higher standard of foster care.
States with Little Involvement
These states place children with relatives without a separate foster care payment. The relative is usually allowed to apply for the state’s welfare payment system. There are usually no licensing requirements for relatives in these situations. Children may be placed in less than ideal conditions, and the state may never be aware of the issues due to the lack of regulation.
States with Foster Care Licensing
These states do not treat relative and kin homes differently from regular nonrelated homes. The relative foster home must be licensed, and payments are the same as any other home. It is a highly regulated system; however, children are usually at less risk for further abuse in families since the regulation may eliminate suspect environments. The disadvantage is that some relatives may not be able to obtain a foster care license and, therefore, are not allowed to care for their children.
Current Child Welfare Practice
The profession of child welfare has begun to focus on the importance of relative and kin placements for children in the system. The federal government audits child welfare systems and has begun to track the percentage of relative placements. Research has supported that children’s well-being is enhanced by placing them with family. Natural cultural systems are now respected as being capable of child caring. Family group conferencing arose out of the relative placement debate within the indigenous communities of Australia. Through a family gathering when children are put into the system, the child’s family decides who and how the children will be cared for.
Bibliography:
- Berrick, J. D., Barth, R. P., & Needell, B. (1994). A comparison of kinship foster homes and foster family homes: Implications for kinship foster care as family preservation. Children and Youth Services Review, 16(1–2), 33–63.
- Chipman, R., Wells, S. J., & Johnson, M. A. (2002). The meaning of quality in kinship foster care: Caregiver, child, and worker perspectives. Families in Society, 83(5), 508–520.
- Gibbs, P., & Muller, U. (2000). Kinship foster care: Moving to the mainstream: Controversy, policy, and outcomes. Adoption Quarterly, 4(2), 57–87.
This example Kinship Care Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.
See also:
ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER
Always on-time
Plagiarism-Free
100% Confidentiality
Special offer!
