POWERPOINT ASSIGNMENT

profilephaynes
AddictionImpactonChildrenNEW....pptx

Addiction Impact on Children

Presented By: Pamela Easter

AGENDA

Introduction- Addiction Impact on Children

Specific Services/Programs Relevant to Family Members

Legislation

Availability of Services to Family Members

Issues Related to Cultural Diversity

Issues Related Discrimination, Oppression and Social Justice

Issues Related to Economic Justice

Best Practices

Ethical Concerns Related to Services/Program

References

2

INTRODUCTION- Addiction Impact on Children

The risk of child abuse and neglect is higher in families where parents abuse substances.

The highest incidence of abuse and neglect occurs in families where both parents abuse alcohol.

Parental substance abuse may leave children more vulnerable to sexual abuse by family members or by strangers

Laws in several states support that maternal drug use is a form of child abuse and neglect.

SPECIFIC SERVICES/PROGRAMS RELEVANT TO FAMILY MEMBERS

Stepping -Stones Family Support Program/ Work-Shop

Outcome measures

The Coping Questionnaire

The Family Drug Support Program Questionnaire

Gethin A, Trimingham T, Chang T, Farrell M, Ross J. (2016). Coping with problematic drug use in the family: An evaluation of the Stepping-Stones program. Drug Alcohol Rev 2016;35:470–476, DOI:10.1111/dar.12327

Facts show that this program offers specific serves, program and support relevant outcomes, coping and drug support to aid each family member in the home. Stepping- Stones is primarily designed for people who have been dealing with another's chronic long‐term addiction; around 90% of participants are parents of adult children, with an average age around 50, of which approximately two‐thirds are mothers.

Outcome measures

The main outcome measures used to assess family member coping were the Coping Questionnaire (CQ) [ 18] , and the FDSQ. In addition, the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ‐8) [ 25] was used as a client satisfaction measure.

The study involved pre‐testing participants on the CQ and re‐testing at 3 months follow up to assess changes on measures of coping; the FDSQ was administered at the start of the Stepping Stones program, and at the end of the program, and at 3 month follow up. The FDSQ was also administered to a group of 48 participants when registering for the course. This group had at least 6 weeks to wait before being able to attend a course; all went on to complete the program and evaluation study. The CSQ‐8 was administered immediately post course.

The Coping Questionnaire

This questionnaire asks family members about their responses to their relative's drug or alcohol consumption, and asks 30 specific questions about their coping actions over the previous 3 months [ 18] . Coping actions relate to the three scales of Engaged, Tolerant and Withdrawal coping. For each question, respondents are given four options as to how often they acted particular ways in the 3 months: ‘no’, ‘once or twice’, ‘sometimes’ and ‘often’, with responses scored at 0, 1, 2 and 3, respectively.

Scores can range between 0 and 90, and a lower overall score, and lower scores on the Engaged and Tolerant subscales generally indicate fewer symptoms (such as feeling anxious or frightened), less negative coping (e.g. cleaning up after the drug user, secrecy) and fewer negative incidents in the family [ 16] . The Withdrawal subscale is more complex as it includes items of positive coping, such as pursing one's own interests; thus this subscale tends to increase as coping improves.

Support for the validity of the CQ has been provided from a number of sources. Consistent means and standard deviations have been observed across populations undertaking the CQ [ 18] , and higher negative coping scores have been correlated with poorer health outcomes, also across a range of settings [ 11] . Evidence for the discriminant validity for the CQ subscales has been provided in that differences in subscales vary in expected directions, for example by subcultural group (i.e. wives in some cultural groups show higher tolerant‐inactive coping), relationship to drug user (parents show less withdrawal or tolerant coping), or by degree of the family member's addiction. The CQ measure has also demonstrated sensitivity to change following interventions to help families cope more effectively [ 6] , and has good internal reliability (a = 0.85) [ 18] .

The Family Drug Support program Questionnaire

The FDSQ is designed to measure changes in coping across seven domains (anger, boundary, control, denial, family, self‐esteem and trust). It includes 28 statements with four survey items relating to each domain. Scoring is on a 5‐point scale from ‘usually’ through to ‘never’; and a score of between 4 and 20 is given for each domain, with an overall coping score calculated between 28 and 140. Examples of statements in the FDSQ include: ‘I often hide the drug user's activities from family and friends’; ‘I feel like unloading my anger on the drug user’; ‘I need to take responsibility for the drug user as they are not capable of managing day‐to‐day affairs and drug treatment’; ‘My personal space is respected by the drug user.’

Low domain scores indicate that a person is struggling with particular issues (e.g. feeling constantly angry, or hiding the problem); higher scores indicate more positive coping. An overall low score suggests negative coping across several domains, whereas a high overall score, that a person is coping more positively. The FDSQ has good internal reliability (a = 0.82).

The FDSQ differs from the CQ in a number of respects, apart from the scoring direction and the number and nature of subscales. It includes for example, questions about a person's self‐esteem and about how angry a person is feeling, neither of which are in the CQ. Even so, at baseline, there was a moderate negative correlation between scores on the FDSQ and CQ, r = −0.42, P < 0.0001. There was also a correlation between the two most similar subscales (‘Tolerant’ from the CQ and combined ‘Boundary’ and ‘Family’ from the FDSQ) r = −0.49, P < 0.0001. The other subscale correlations were small or non‐significant.

Gethin A, Trimingham T, Chang T, Farrell M, Ross J. (2016). Coping with problematic drug use in the family: An evaluation of the Stepping-Stones program. Drug Alcohol Rev 2016;35:470–476, DOI:10.1111/dar.12327

.

4

ADDICTION: IMPACT ON CHILDREN

(Legislation) Shift in Perspective: A Universal Approach to Child Protection

The Progressive Policy Response

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, state and local offers supported most public investments in social services, health care, and education, often working closely with local charitable and religious associations.

The Sheppard-Towner Act

Created the first federal investment in explicitly promoting prenatal and infant care education and health services for families.

The Family First Act: A Bad

Bill that Won’t Go Away

Chapter I of the Act, billed as “Investing in Prevention and Family Services,” would allow Title IV-E funds to be used to fund services meant to keep children out of foster care, including mental health and substance abuse treatment, parent training and counseling, and kinship navigator manager.

Cywnar, G. (2018). US: The Family First Act: A Bad Bill that Won’t Go Away (Commentary) Child Welfare Monitor.

https://childwelfaremonitor.org/2018/02/07/the-family-first-act-a-bad-bill-that-wont-go-away/

 Cywnar, G. (2018). US: The Family First Act: A Bad Bill that Won’t Go Away (Commentary) Child Welfare Monitor.

https://childwelfaremonitor.org/2018/02/07/the-family-first-act-a-bad-bill-that-wont-go-away/

6

LEGISLATION THAT CREATED THE IDENTIFIED SERVICE/PROGRAM

A Shift in Perspective: A Universal

Child Welfare

Parenting

Government Policy

Prevention of Child Abuse

Children’s Accident Prevention

Continuum of Care

Child Safety

Future of Children

Medical Care Costs

Preventive Health Services

Public Welfare

Social Support

Early Diagnosis

Medical Needs Assessment

https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ1220074 

Each process has been put into process as it relates to Legislation that which has created a program to identify services offer children. However, In the United States, two approaches have developed to exercise collective influence on how parents raise their children. One is mandatory public intervention in families who have placed their children at risk, exemplified by the child welfare system. The other is voluntary offers of assistance, for example, child abuse prevention services that place responsibility on parents to determine whether they'll accept the advice they receive and change their behavior. In this article, Deborah Daro traces a shift in emphasis from a Progressive-Era policy that offered common supports to all new parents to a more bifurcated prevention system that emphasizes public investments primarily for those parents and children at highest risk. Moreover, she writes, for the past 50 years, voluntary and mandatory parental assistance have operated independently, with minimal shared agenda setting and planning. She contrasts this to the health care system, where early assessment and diagnosis mean that people receive a continuum of care, based on their level of need. Early medical treatment isn't viewed as intrusive; it's seen as an important first step in protecting health and avoiding more complex and costly therapy. Unfortunately, Daro argues, the policy response to parental shortcomings isn't comparable. There's no adequate early assessment when people become parents, and child welfare agencies typically offer assistance only after a child is harmed. She suggests that the time is right for a universal approach that reaches out to all new parents, offering each family a level of assistance commensurate with their needs. Ideally, she writes, "Seeking out and accepting formal public services to help meet parenting demands should be as acceptable as using preventive health care

7

“SWOT ANALYSIS SERVICES TABLE”

This is just example and analysis services table showing numbers in its weakness, threats, strengths, and opportunities as it relate to services that are offered to each family member. Strengths–Weaknesses–Opportunities–Threats Analysis for a Pediatric Anesthesia Program

Pediatric Quality & Safety5(1):e254, January/February 2020. https://journals.lww.com/pqs/_layouts/15/oaks.journals/ImageView.aspx?k=pqs:2020:01000:00008&i=T1&year=2020&issue=01000&article=00008&type=Fulltext

8

AVAILABILITY OF SERVICES

Communities Connecting

Community Solution

Prevention of Child Abuse

Prevention of Substance Abuse

Domestic Violence Awareness

Human Services Programs

Society Support

Child Welfare

Evaluation of Human Services Program

Bruce, L. Lane, M., Wacker, D., Ann, E. (2017). Child Welfare. 2017, Vol. 95

Issue 5, p1-24 http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&sid=e220cf9a-f444-

4891-b7de- b8f792394b41%40sdc-v-sessmgr01

Child Welfare offer these service through the Communities NOW: Connecting for Kids is a primary child abuse and neglect prevention initiative of the Butler Institute for Families at the University of Denver. This paper seeks to demonstrate program outcomes, based on findings from the most recent cross-site evaluation. Training evaluation and follow-up surveys suggest that Communities NOW has met its primary objectives to (1) educate everyday citizens regarding issues surrounding child abuse and neglect and family stressors and (2) encourage them to intervene effectively to support families and protect children from harm. 

Bruce, L. Lane, M., Wacker, D., Ann, E. (2017). Child Welfare. 2017, Vol. 95 Issue 5, p1-24.

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&sid=e220cf9a-f444-4891-b7de-

b8f792394b41%40sdc-v-sessmgr01

9

ISSUES RELATED TO CULTURAL DIVERSITY/COMPETENCE

Key Considerations”

Conduct a needs and a capacity assessment to identify cultural commonalities and differences to be addressed, and the ability of your program to address them.

Involve individuals representing the diversity of your community around the planning table of your organization and encourage cross-cultural dialogues.

Facilitate both formal and informal opportunities for cross-cultural interactions among both program recipients and program staff.

https://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/resources-and-training/tpp-and-paf-resources/cultural-competence/index.html

Culturally competent programs maintain a set of attitudes, perspectives, behaviors, and policies – both individually and organizationally – that promote positive and effective interactions with diverse cultures. Practicing cultural competence to honor diversity means understanding the core needs of your target audience and designing services and materials to meet those needs strategically. It is important to regularly and honestly evaluate your organizational and operational practices to ensure all voices are heard and reflected.

https://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/resources-and-training/tpp-and-paf-resources/cultural-competence/index.html

10

vjoness5469 (v) - Key Considerations Conduct a needs and a capacity assessment to identify cultural commonalities and differences to be addressed, and the ability of your program to address them. Involve individuals representing the diversity of your community around the planning table of your organization and encourage cross-cultural dialogues. Facilitate both formal and informal opportunities for cross-cultural interactions among both program recipients and program staff.

vjoness5469 (v) -

ISSUES RELATED TO DISCRIMINATION OPPRESSION AND SOCIAL JUSTICE

“Shared child-rearing standards are rare, particularly in a multicultural society that values the rights of parents to determine their child’s best interests. In setting common standards, policy makers struggle to balance three aspirational, but often competing, values—child safety, healthy child development, and parental autonomy. “

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1220074

Child Safety

At Risk Persons

Home Visits

Public Health

Resource Allocation

“In the United States, two approaches have developed to exercise collective influence on how parents raise their children. One is mandatory public intervention in families who have placed their children at risk, exemplified by the child welfare system. The other is voluntary offers of assistance, for example, child abuse prevention services that place responsibility on parents to determine whether they’ll accept the advice they receive and change their behavior. In this article, Deborah Daro traces a shift in emphasis from a Progressive-Era policy that offered common supports to all new parents to a more bifurcated prevention system that emphasizes public investments primarily for those parents and children at highest risk. Moreover, she writes, for the past 50 years, voluntary and mandatory parental assistance have operated independently, with minimal shared agenda setting and planning. She contrasts this to the health care system, where early assessment and diagnosis mean that people receive a continuum of care, based on their level of need. Early medical treatment isn’t viewed as intrusive; it’s seen as an important first step in protecting health and avoiding more complex and costly therapy. Unfortunately, Daro argues, the policy response to parental shortcomings isn’t comparable. There’s no adequate early assessment when people become parents, and child welfare agencies typically offer assistance only after a child is harmed. She suggests that the time is right for a universal approach that reaches out to all new parents, offering each family a level of assistance commensurate with their needs. Ideally, she writes, “Seeking out and accepting formal public services to help meet parenting demands should be as acceptable as using preventive health care.”

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1220074

11

ISSUES RELATED TO ECONOMIC JUSTICE

The Children’s Bureau, established in 1912, represented a new federal presence in childcare and family support, operating new programs and underwriting research on the nations infant mortality rate.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/index.htm

https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/programs/child-welfarechild-labor/childrens-bureau-a-brief-history-resources /

BEST PRACTICES

Infusing Clinical Supervision Throughout Child Welfare 

Practice: Advancing Effective Implementation of Family-Centered Practice Through Supervisory Processes

Evidence Best Practices Educational Methods Educational Practices Educational Research Evidence Expertise Intervention Medical Research Randomized Controlled Trials Scientific Research Statistical Analysis Student Improvement Theory Practice Relationship

https://eric.ed.gov/?ti=Evidence+Based+Practice

Lietz, Cynthia A. Clinical Social Work Journal. Dec2018, Vol. 46 Issue 4, p331-340. 10p. 1 Chart. DOI: 10.1007/s10615-018-0672-7.

Child welfare supervision is fundamental to advancing the quality of practice when seeking to ensure the safety, permanency, and well-being of children. Child welfare supervisors serve administrative, educational, and support functions as they oversee frontline caseworkers and direct service providers. Clinical supervision, a dialog-driven process of case review and consultation is situated within the educational function. The process of clinical supervision is essential to child welfare practice, because it prompts reflection and builds analytical thinking skills needed to address complex situations involved in child protection. Despite increased recognition regarding the importance of clinical supervision, child welfare supervision continues to focus primarily on administrative tasks. Organizational climate and external pressures push this administrative agenda. In addition, many child welfare supervisors lack experience, training, and therefore competency in facilitating clinical case reviews. Strengths-Based Supervision (SBS; Lietz 2013) is a model of clinical supervision that was developed to (a) increase child welfare supervisors’ intentionality regarding the importance of infusing clinical supervision into child welfare supervision and (b) advance the skills needed to implement this practice effectively representing one solution to this ongoing challenge.

Lietz, Cynthia A. Clinical Social Work Journal. Dec2018, Vol. 46 Issue 4, p331-340. 10p. 1 Chart. DOI: 10.1007/s10615-018-0672-7.

Scope Note: 

Educational, therapeutic, or other methods integrating rigorous research and clinical expertise that lead to improvements in student performance, patient care, or other services.

13

ETHICAL CONCERNS RELATED TO SERVICES/PROGRAM

First Nations parenting and child reunification: Identifying strengths, barriers, and community needs within the child welfare system.

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=5f6d17ab-7781-4805-b30e-

d79b8234b349%40sessionmgr101&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPXNoaWImc2l0ZT1lZHMtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=130646732&db=ccm

First Nations communities are seeking to improve current service delivery models and create alternative evidence‐based strategies. A First Nations child welfare organization has prioritized further understanding of reunification and parenting, including identification of successes and barriers to reunification, and service needs within communities. These priorities were addressed with a community‐based participatory research model and guided by a Research Advisory. Results were analyzed using a blend of grounded theory and thematic analysis techniques. Participants indicated that placing children with extended family or within home communities facilitate best child outcomes. These reunifications could be increased by promoting parental and community capacity. Successes identified within communities included available supports, such as those that increased empowerment and community capacity. Identified barriers within communities were the lack of culturally appropriate services, hesitancy to obtain available support due to fears of child welfare intervention, and mental health difficulties of community member.

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=5f6d17ab-7781-4805-b30e-

d79b8234b349%40sessionmgr101&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPXNoaWImc2l0ZT1lZHMtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=130646732&db=ccm

14

REFERENCES

Anne Cohn, An Approach to Preventing Child Abuse, 2nd ed. (Chicago, IL:

National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse, 1983); Ray E. Heifer, “A Review of the Literature on the Prevention of Child Abuse and

Neglect,” Child Abuse Neglect 6 (1982): 251-61, https://doi.org/10.1016/0145- 2134(82)90028-X

Bruce, L. Lane, M., Wacker, D., Ann, E. (2017). Child Welfare. 2017, Vol. 95 Issue 5,

p1-24.

http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&sid=e220cf9a-f444-4891-b7de- b8f792394b41%40sdc-v-sessmgr01

 

Cywnar, G. (2018). US: The Family First Act: A Bad Bill that Won’t Go Away

(Commentary) Child Welfare Monitor.

https://childwelfaremonitor.org/2018/02/07/the-family-first-act-a-bad-bill-that-wont-go-away

Gethin A, Trimingham T, Chang T, Farrell M, Ross J. (2016). Coping with

problematic drug use in the family: An evaluation of the Stepping-Stones

program. Drug Alcohol Rev 2016;35:470–476,

DOI:10.1111/dar.12327

References

15

ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

Lietz, Cynthia A. Clinical Social Work Journal. Dec2018, Vol. 46 Issue 4, p331-340.

10p. 1 Chart. DOI: 10.1007/s10615-018-0672-7.

Strengths–Weaknesses–Opportunities–Threats Analysis for a Pediatric Anesthesia

Program Pediatric Quality & Safety5(1):e254, January/February 2020.

https ://journals.lww.com/pqs/_layouts/15/oaks.journals/ImageView.aspx?k=pqs:2020:01000:00008&i=T1&year=2020&issue=01000&article=00008&type=Fulltext

https://clphs.health.mo.gov/lphs/lessonplans/trainers_guide_module_13.pdf

http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=5f6d17ab-7781-4805-b30e- d79b8234b349%40sessionmgr101&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPXNoaWImc2l0ZT1lZHMtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#AN=130646732&db=ccm

https://eric.ed.gov/?ti=Evidence+Based+Practice

https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ1220074 

https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/programs/child-welfarechild-labor/childrens-bureau-a-brief-history-resources /

https://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/resources-and-training/tpp-and-paf-resources/cultural-competence/index.html

 

Additional References

16

Thank You! The End!

Thank You! The End!

17

.MsftOfcThm_Accent1_Stroke { stroke:#5FB622; }