| SERVICES |
| CAPABILITIES |
| PRACTICE MODELS |
| BOOKS & VIDEOS |
| LINKS |
| CONTACT |
| HOME |
| Child Safety Articles |
| CHILD SAFETY ARTICLES |
| CHILD WELFARE WISDOM |
| ARTICLE ARCHIVE |
 |
| monthly article for November Integrating Caregiver Protective Capacities into Case Plans Introduction Case plans are established and implemented
to change things. Yeah, everyone knows that, right? Case plans
may also be called treatment plans or service plans. Whatever
you call a case plan, its purpose is remediation—to end
up with results that remove the need for CPS intervention. Case
plans and safety plans are different, which we explained in our
December 2003 article. You can find it in the archived articles.
Case plans do not replace the need for a safety plan while children
remain unsafe. The purposes of these two plans are different
which is important for you to understand. These plans with their
different purposes can co-exist as efforts are expended in changing
that which makes a child unsafe. We’ve noticed that sometimes case plans can be quite broad, attempting to address every ill or unmet need that exists within a family. While we don’t take issue with the idea of treating a wide range of needs and concerns, we know that there is no choice about whether to treat—to change—safety related concerns. ASFA Brings Focus to Ongoing CPS The Adoption and Safe Families Act requires you to address safety concerns in case plans:
Sure, ASFA is not explicit about exactly
how safety concerns are to be addressed, but a fair interpretation
supports the responsibility to do so. According to this ASFA
provision, a case plan must at a minimum provide services that
make changes which result in a safe home. The interpretation
is that case plans address what has made a home unsafe. We’ve
pitched to you that the definition for “unsafe” is
the presence of present or impending danger and insufficient
caregiver protective capacities to mitigate the danger. So provision
(1) (B) above says that case plans must contain the ways and
means for improving conditions that make children unsafe. The
cause that necessitates a placement of a child is “the
child is unsafe.” Reconsider our definition for unsafe:
safety threats are present, and caregiver protective capacities
are diminished. So case plans must be established and implemented
in order that “a child being unsafe” can be resolved.
There are only two ways to resolve a child being unsafe: (1)
eliminate safety threats or (2) enhance diminished caregiver
protective capacities. If you’ve been reading our monthly
articles, you know that our answer to the ASFA requirement to
integrate safety concerns into case plans is to enhance diminished
caregiver protective capacities. In some instances, the safety
threat that exists within a family exists separate from a caregiver,
but the caregiver is unwilling or unable to manage the threat.
In some of those same instances, eliminating the safety threat
without addressing caregiver protective capacity does little
to assure that a similar or new threat won’t once again
result in a child being unsafe. Sometimes a safety threat actually
is the caregiver such as a caregiver that is out of control.
By enhancing the protective capacities of such a person, essentially,
you eliminate the safety threat since the threat and the diminished
protective capacity are inextricably related. So, enhancing diminished caregiver protective
capacities is the most promising approach to meeting the requirements
as described in ASFA and, more importantly, achieving the safe
home as identified in ASFA as the desirable outcome. In recent
months, we’ve discussed the importance of assessing caregiver
protective capacities in order to arrive at what must change
in order to determine what will be addressed in a case plan.
The Protective Capacity Assessment—more a process than
an evaluation—is implemented collaboratively with caregivers
in order to arrive at conclusions about what must change. And,
in ASFA language, that could be elaborated on as what must change
in order to establish a safe home for a child. Since you and
a caregiver reach some mutual agreement about what must change,
what are some things that help you to do that? Caregiver Protective Capacities For starters, let’s get back in
touch with what we are talking about when referring to caregiver
protective capacities. Caregiver protective capacities are personal
and parenting behavioral, cognitive and emotional characteristics
that specifically and directly can be associated with being protective
of one’s young. There are a number of things that make
a personal characteristic a protective capacity:
Behavioral Protective Capacities
Cognitive Protective Capacities
Emotional Protective Capacities
Remember that children are not safe because caregiver protective capacities are diminished. As you consider this list of twenty five protective capacities, you can imagine that in many, if not most, cases involving child safety, several of these protective capacities may be diminished. That produces a serious challenge when collaborating with a caregiver during a Protective Capacity Assessment to figure out where to begin.
It can be helpful to you when getting ready to reach a mutual agreement with a caregiver about where to begin to consider why or how protective capacities have become diminished. Some caregivers don’t know. One reason caregiver protective capacities might be diminished is the person simply doesn’t have the knowledge necessary to be a protective parent. The lack of knowledge may be related to limited information or limited experience. Some caregivers deny the reality of the world around them. Such denial need not be pathological in a mental disorder sense. Caregivers may deny realities in order to give themselves permission to conduct their lives as they choose. Some caregivers are unable to fulfill their essential needs. While the range of unmet needs may be somewhat extensive, fundamentally, you are likely to find among some caregivers that their diminished protective capacities are explained by their preoccupation with a couple of needs: (a) the need to love and be loved and (b) the need to feel worthwhile to themselves and others. Another way of thinking about this is to combine these two needs into one—the need to be connected in satisfying ways to others. Some caregivers are isolated and lack support. While this may just as well fit within the last item on needs, it is important enough to get its own attention. All of us fulfill our needs by being involved with other people. So we can conclude that some caregivers’ protective capacities are diminished because they are disconnected or alienated from others, or the people they are involved with are destructive and manipulative. Some caregivers are irresponsible. People are responsible when they go about meeting their needs and fulfilling their roles in ways that do not deprive others of the ability to fulfill their needs. Some caregivers are not motivated. We’d like to think that every person who has a child of their own is motivated to care for and protect that child. It’s not true. Some caregivers are highly motivated in some areas of their lives, perhaps, but are specifically not heavily inspired, influenced or stimulated to be effective parents or to assure their child’s safety and well being. Some caregivers have developmental and historical damage. Agreeably, many caregivers CPS encounters are products of highly destructive childhoods and trauma that pervade their lives. Here we have a problem of readiness and preparation in the sense that such people who are damaged goods are simply totally ill-prepared emotionally, intellectually and socially to parent. Some caregivers are experiencing developmental or life crises. While maybe not as often as other explanations, sometimes people are experiencing an event or life circumstance that reduces their effectiveness in general as a person and, therefore, as a parent. These are among the reasons or influences that explain how caregivers’ capacities have become diminished. So, when thinking about what to focus on in a case plan, thought must be given to these kinds of things when planning how to approach change—what the caregiver will do in order to enhance his or her protective capacities. If you think about it, there are two things to keep in mind: the diminished protective capacity and what has contributed to the diminished protective capacity.
When commiserating with a caregiver, as the Protective Capacity Assessment comes to a conclusion, bring to mind and introduce into conversations some of the following that may apply and help in deciding where to begin and what diminished protective capacities to include in the case plan.
This refers to a diminished protective capacity that is vivid and impressive with respect to explaining how it is that a caregiver is not protective. Among diminished protective capacities, this is the one that you both agree undeniably must be addressed.
This refers to a diminished protective
capacity that serves as the root or cause of other diminished
protective capacities. It is like observing that several protective
capacities are diminished, but they all seem initially influenced
or flow from a single one.
This criterion acknowledges that some
caregiver protective capacities are closely related. For instance,
you can see that empathy, love and bonding are closely related
protective capacities. It is possible that among some caregivers
that one diminished protective capacity actually represents a
sum of others. In our example, a parent who has difficulties
loving a child could have problems with bonding and empathy.
But the problems of love represent a sum of all of these.
Collaboration allows you to realize what is of most interest to yourself and the caregiver. If there are more than one diminished protective capacities, it may be simply a choice of where to begin or what to address that is associated by interest.
This refers to considering among the diminished protective capacities which might have prompt results; be easily addressed; ripple into changing other diminished capacities.
Sometimes the place to begin is where a person feels the least challenged, threatened or feels less personal risk or commitment.
This refers to diminished protective capacities for which a person feels the least concern about addressing or defending. This includes higher likelihood of openness and willingness to approach change because of no felt need for maintaining status quo. There is a ruling principle in all of this that should be applied as you talk through with a caregiver what diminished protective capacity or capacities to select for the case plan: Mutual Agreement. We emphasized that mutuality is the cornerstone in this approach to ongoing CPS. Mutuality demands equal standing between you and the caregiver and caregiver self-determination. When employing these ideas expressed in this criteria, as part of the conversation, keep in the mind the importance of arriving together at what must change. |
We
provide consultation, training and technical assistance to
child welfare agencies faced with the constant challenges
of serving and protecting children and families.
|