The Kinship Triad: A Service Delivery Model

Abstract

Even though child placement agencies have come to recognize that kinship care provides continuity for the child's familial and cultural relationships, what is needed is a well-defined model for service delivery in kinship programs-one that provides a system of services to the child, biological parent, and relative caregiver as a union. This article describes one such time-limited model of service delivery that uses a family preservation approach and focuses on permanency for the child within a cultural context. When children are placed with relatives because their parents are unable or unwilling to provide adequate care for them, the child welfare system must recognize its responsibility for service provision if care and custody are with the state. Service provision to this child welfare population, most commonly known as formal kinship care, has been limited and not clearly defined by child welfare agencies [Iglehart 1994; Berrick et al. 1994; Social Services Administration's Task Force... 1994; Thornton 1991; Dubowitz 1990]. As the use of this substitute family care system has increased dramatically over the last decade [Gleeson & Craig 1994], so has the need for a clearly defined service delivery model to cope with the unique needs of the kinship triad-child, parent, and relative caregiver. A system of services must be directed to this union of three to ensure a permanent living arrangement for the children [Scannapieco & Jackson 1996]. Formal kinship care as a child welfare service evolved in the 1980s even as many policymakers and practitioners protested and resisted. Much of the resistance came as a result of the system's lack of confidence in the capacity of relatives to protect and provide adequate care for children. The use of kinship placements began to escalate after passage of the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act of 1980 [P.L. 96-272], not because of a rising belief in the value of kinship placements but because of a decrease in the availability of nonrelative foster parents [National Commission on Foster Family Care 1991] and a desperate need for placement resources. Initially, most social service agencies conceptualized kinship care as family foster care. Therefore, kinship service delivery models most often reflect the standards of practice for children in nonrelative family foster care. Foster kinship placements are often referred to as kinship foster care [Takas 1993], which denotes their similarity to family foster care. As policymakers and practitioners confront the rising use of relative care, there is an emerging recognition of the difficulty in making the family foster care system a model for practice in kinship cases, and of the need to distinguish kinship care placements from care by nonrelatives [Pecora 1992]. By placing children with their extended family, the child welfare system may be able to prevent other out-of-home care and/or achieve family reunification. Therefore, kinship care program models should be conceptualized in keeping with family preservation policies and practices. In our changing child welfare system, the need to develop usable, expanding, and internally consistent models of practice is urgent; such models are long overdue. To improve service delivery across the child welfare continuum, clearly defined comprehensive models of practice should be developed in accord with the unique needs of varied service populations. This article provides a description of characteristics, service components, and service limitations of a time-limited, comprehensive service delivery model for kinship care programs. The model uses a family preservation approach within a cultural context toward a goal of permanency planning for children. Functions of the Model A service delivery model describes the helping process (i.e., the dynamics and skills required in the beginning, middle, and ending phases) for a particular population within a prescribed framework. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 29 citations exist upstream.