Family Impact Analysis of Foster Care Policy
Student’s Name
Institution of Affiliation
Course Title
Professor’s Name
Date
Introduction
There are numerous debates surrounding the effectiveness of Foster care in the United States, making it one of the major issues in society today. The Family First Prevention Service Act (FFPSA) of 2018 holds the policies responsible for foster care and, in this case, education and finance policies. Despite the many efforts that have been put in place to implement the policy and examine its success, the policy has been faced with many criticisms and prejudices, and therefore assessing its programs and milestones to determine its success so far is what drove my interest in this particular issue because my assertion is that the policy has changed the landscape of foster care in a positive way. The H.R. 253 Family First Prevention Service Act of 2O17 115th congress (2017-2018) was first passed on February 9, 2018, and became law on December 20, 2019, as part of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020 under Section 602 and is currently being enacted (Lindell et al., 2020). The FFPSA is a federal law and is responsible for the provision of essentials such as finances to states to enable child welfare systems to enhance support services to help children remain in their homes and cut on the unnecessary utilization of congregate care. In other words, it supports states to develop prevention-based infrastructure for the welfare of children. The families that will be affected by foster care policy are Foster families and adoptive families (directly) and single-parent households (indirectly), e.g., the divorced, separated, and widowed, with dependent children with special developmental needs.
Support rather than a substitute for family members’ responsibilities to one another?
The policy prioritizes support rather than a substitution for family members because its primary objective is to provide services without interfering with the family structure or functioning (Lindell et al., 2020). The policy will achieve this by providing federal welfare funding in various ways while ensuring that the children remain safely in their homes under the care of their parents. The policy will revitalize family-based placement only when foster care is obligatory. The states have been afforded the chance to access IV-E funds for their programs. With the set conditions on evidence-based tools and programs, the legislation will widen opportunities to employ data and research to foster funding and decision-making, which will ensure that these families receive their needs without having to substitute the family members’ responsibility to one another.
Reinforce family members’ commitment to each other and to the stability of the family unit?
In order to reinforce the family members’ commitment to each other and to the stability of the family unit, Child Welfare Waiver Demonstration projects altogether with the IV-E funds provided under the Act in the United States will prevent the children from going into foster care. These projects are reliable in stabilizing the family unit because they have undergone scrutiny and approval by the Department of Health and Human Services in the USA. Similarly, kin caregivers or parents of foster care candidates or members eligible for foster care will be provided with time-specific and evidence-based prevention programs or services that will prevent them from entering foster care. Furthermore, when it is necessary for a child to enter foster care, the Act prioritizes the employment of family-based settings where relatives are involved, thus reinforcing family members’ commitment to each other. This will be achieved through the use of Evidence-based kinship navigator services meant to boost family members’ commitment to one another (McKlindon, 2019). Therefore, these services are intended to provide finances for needs and ensure that the family unit is kept intact or maintained, which will further protect children from subsequent mistreatment by foster parents. Therefore the services will be instrumental in shaping society whilst helping the children and their families.
Recognition of the power and persistence of family ties and the promotion of healthy relationships?
Although restoration and enhancement of healthy relationships are quite challenging because policies target individuals instead of families, the policy tries to mend this through in several ways. For instance, the employment of theories such as the self-efficacy theory gives a rationale for embracing family autonomy in a manner that seeks to supplement rather than supplant the family members’ responsibilities. The policy also seeks to provide education where parents and couples will learn about aspects such as language, empathy, compassion, active listening, and respect, as well as socio-emotional elements that will improve the quality of their relationships with each other and their children. Furthermore, support and prevention services will be provided during the early stages of the issue before much damage has been done. Studies have shown that the responsible fatherhood programs have so far been beneficial in the relationship between fathers and their children (Bogenschneider et al., 2017). Home visits have also enhanced better relationships between couples and children because they reduce the risk of violence and aggressive behavior. This way, the policy will prove that it recognizes the power and persistence of family ties because it will prevent the families from completely breaking down.
Acknowledgment and respect for diversity of family life
The very first measure that will show acknowledgment for diversity is the engagement of parents or compromised families belonging to minority groups such as the blacks and the Asians. Access to services such as funding, family support programs, and mental health services will be provided to all the families across the states regardless of their ethnicity, economic status, or position in the social class hierarchy. Furthermore, families with children who have special needs such as the disabled will be provided with special needs services and all resources that will help prevent the children from the need for foster care. Families who live in the rural and suburban areas will also be covered by the programs (Bogenschneider et al., 2017). So far, the federal government has reimbursed funds to all the states to cater to needs for all the families in need with structure ranging from adopted families, birth families, stepfamilies, and extended families.
Engagement with families
Creating youth groups because such groups help reduce risks of drug abuse and improving their cognitive functions. Additionally, families can be used as administrators of state benefits to its members. For example, eligibility for financial aid can be determined only by engaging families in the process (McKlindon, 2019). Families will also be involved in conducting research on potential policy issues. In some instances, members of the families have helped family analysts to analyze information collected whilst also acting as tools for the implementation of the program.
Intended vs. Unintended consequences
The family-based approach seeks to achieve goals such as the creation of awareness among the public regarding the policy issue, development of frameworks that will bring an influential perspective to new policies, stronger bonds between couples and parent-child relationships, greater contentment with the services and program as well as impressive parenting behavior, child behavior and overall wellbeing of the family. On the other hand, the unintended consequences would be leaving out some families such as birth families while concentrating more on adoptive and foster families and acquiring less knowledge of the importance of families than expected.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Family Impact Lens is instrumental in the organization of frameworks that can be used for new policies and programs for families’ wellbeing (Bogenschneider et al., 2017). Regarding foster care, the Family Impact Lens is quite useful in determining eligibility for resources such as funding for needy families to prevent children from falling into foster care. Without a Family Impact Analysis, the importance of diversity in families will have been easily overlooked. Nonetheless, applying this tool has enhanced my critical thinking skills because I have realized that foster care is more than just the provision of care to children; it involves the wellbeing of the child and their entire family as well.
References
Bogenschneider, K., Little, O. M., Ooms, T., Benning, S., Cadigan, K., & Corbett, T. (2017). The family impact lens: A family‐focused, evidence‐informed approach to policy and practice. Family Relations, 61(3), 514-531.
Lindell, K. U., Sorenson, C. K., & Mangold, S. V. (2020). The Family First Prevention Services Act: A New Era of Child Welfare Reform. Public Health Reports, 135(2), 282-286.
McKlindon, A. (2019). Applying the Research and Evaluation Provisions of the Family First Prevention Services Act.