Factors associated with reunification success or breakdown

As well as engaging the family, comprehensive assessment, strong safety and support networks, the inclusion of a range of support services, several other factors contribute to effective reunification. The following table offers a summary of key messages from research which identify factors associated with successful reunifications or reunification breakdown (Wilkins and Farmer):

Australian research (Panozzo et al.) supports the findings outlined in the table above and highlights the following factors as particularly relevant to successful reunification:

• Culturally informed and culturally safe interventions and supports for the child and their family.
• Frequent contact between the child and parents which is mindful of quality of interaction and increases in time.
• An active network and care team surrounds the parents.

Risks to successful reunification in the Australian context also reflect the table above. Factors include:

• the longer a child remains in care, the less likely reunification will occur
• parents and families that have a closed system, lack of network and social isolation
• families who experience difficulties with poverty, chronic mental illness, ingrained substance abuse and housing
• children who have physical health problems, disabilities or high level of behavioural support needs
• where poor attachment between a parent and child is observed
• children living in rural or remote areas.

These factors for successful or unsuccessful reunification are not reasons to reunify or not reunify a child. Use strengths-based practice and consider ways to build on identified indicators of success for each family. Be aware of the indicators for failed reunification and consider what strategies can help a family mitigate those risks.

Having looked at essential elements of reunification and factors associated with whether reunification of a child to the care of one or both parents is likely to be successful or not, attention can now turn to more specific areas of practice which support reunification.

Effective practice towards reunification requires holistic decision making to ensure the focus of interventions is not lost amongst organisational and systemic pressures and frustrations. These frustrations can sometimes impact on objectivity and practitioners may find it easier to notice evidence that supports, rather than challenges, negative perceptions of a family, particularly if they are tricky to work with (NCCD Children’s Research Centre). 

Also, once the immediate risk has been addressed by bringing the child into care, it can be tempting to put the work aside to focus on more pressing priorities with other children and families. Find ways to maintain the urgency and rigour required to progress structured, safe and timely reunification and be proactive in seeking positive outcomes for a child. Breaking that momentum can contribute to a child drifting in care.

Talking about reunification

The decision to reunify and the process of reunification is made up of numerous conversations with the child, family and their network. Conversations with parents are central to this and require practitioners to draw on communication skills based on unconditional positive regard to work with the resistance, anger, disempowerment, shame and grief a parent experiences when a child is removed from their care.

From day one, parents need to understand the reasons a child entered care (immediate harm indicators recorded in the safety assessment), ongoing risks to the safety of the child and how to achieve safety and demonstrate acts of protection. Using the Collaborative Assessment and Planning Framework tool with parents helps to build a picture of these elements and to ensure both strengths and worries are considered. This informs the development of the case plan and the Safe Contact Tool. Transparent conversations will help to clarify what they can expect from practitioners and what practitioners will expect from them. Explain the non-negotiables and then work together to develop solutions.

It is important to communicate clearly that reunification is the preferred primary permanency goal. The process of achieving this outcome also includes conversations around concurrent case planning and the need to involve the family in planning for an alternative permanency option just in case reunification cannot occur. Consider the Framework for Practice values of family and community connection, partnership, strengths and solutions, curiosity and learning.

Ensure conversations with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families are shaped by the elements of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle, especially partnership, participation and connection. Involving an independent person and the Family Participation Program can strengthen participation for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parents and older children.

Change is not easy

Progress towards reunification will be supported by partnering with parents to build a network and find motivation to make the changes necessary to enable their child to return to their care.

Acknowledge that these changes are hard and at times can feel overwhelming. Use a strength based approach to consider parenting capacity alongside how they may function day-to-day – some days are better than others, and a parent’s capacity may be greater than what their functioning may appear on a bad day.  

Privilege and oppression

Maintaining a position of curiosity and learning can help to understand the behaviour of others. How can the lens of privilege and oppression help to put things into context when working with a family towards reunification? Be mindful of the privilege practitioners hold when working for a statutory authority as well as other characteristics that lend themselves to positions of power.

Some strategies to build connections and navigate the differences created by privilege and oppression include to:

• differentiate between who a person is and their behaviour
• recognise the power imbalance
• check in about a behaviour or response to avoid a misunderstanding
• acknowledge if something is unclear
• remember the mnemonic ‘RUAD’
  • Recognise and name what is different to be able to work with it
  • Understand the difference by asking questions and learning about it
  • Appreciate and value what difference can bring to a situation
  • Difference can be used to improve practice and outcomes.

The importance of hope and motivation to change

The success of work with parents towards reunification is dependent on hope and a motivation to change – it is difficult to achieve real change without it. The paradoxical role of a Child Safety practitioner does not always make it easy to keep parents hopeful and can sometimes lead to conflict when talking about the changes that are required to make reunification possible.    

Resistance is often inextricably linked to change and can reflect anxiety, uncertainty and worry rather than an inherent refusal to do things differently. Motivational interviewing techniques can help practitioners when faced with resistance and denial from parents about their situation. This approach acknowledges people as the experts in their lives and mobilises their own values to encourage changes in behaviour (Watson). Recognise that change is difficult. By skilfully applying active listening, practitioners can support parents to think through their resistance, or ambivalence, and help them to find a pathway to prepare for change. 

When working towards reunification, motivational interviewing can bring parents into the process as partners rather than passive recipients. Watson cites four principles of engagement that can guide practitioners when using this approach to build motivation: 

Remember to emphasise the role of the network and how essential this is to support hope and motivation to change. Involvement with Child Safety can make parents feel isolated for many reasons, including if they are embarrassed or ashamed about their circumstances. 

Ask them to think about people that care for them and their child, who can help and support them through this journey. Through the reunification process, consider how the network can grow and help keep parents motivated. Without motivation, practitioners may see compliance but not real, lasting change (NCCD Children’s Research Centre).

Be transparent about the need for change

• what needs to change 
• how this change can be demonstrated and 
• the need for a clear decision based on risk, contact and safety.

Having honest and transparent conversations with a child and family will help to build strong relationships and enable you to partner with them around key decisions about reunification and alternative plans for permanency. When working towards reunifying a child to the care of their parents, there are three things that need to be clear from day one these are:

Collaborative case planning for reunification includes a focus on both strengths and needs and can be articulated using worry and goal statements.

Worry statements can focus assessment and planning at different points on the child protection continuum. 

At the assessment stage, worry statements are recorded in the Assessment and Outcome and the Collaborative Assessment and Planning Framework tool. 

They explain the risk, that is, what Child Safety is worried might happen in the future based on the assessment of past and/or current harm and risk. 

Where the outcome of an assessment is substantiated child in need of protection, worry statements are developed to assist everyone to understand what Child Safety is concerned might happen to harm the child in the future if nothing changes.  

All worries need to be explained to the family and network so there is a clear understanding about what the risks are and reflect why the child was removed. Robust worry statements describe what the child will experience, not just the actions of the parents (NCCD Children’s Research Centre). Worry statements can then be turned into goal statements, which create a well-defined picture of what safety will look like when it is achieved. When thinking about reunification, goal statements provide a pathway for a child to return safely home. 

Clear goal statements are SMART, and outline: 

• who is part of the family’s network and/or the plan
• what actions will be taken by the parent, carers or safety and support network to address the worry statement
• how long the behaviour will need to be demonstrated for Child Safety to be confident the behaviour will continue
• how risk will be reduced.

Case example

John was removed from the care of his mother Jane due to significant physical harm caused by excessive discipline. 

How to demonstrate change

Contact or family connection time is an important opportunity for parents to demonstrate changes in behaviours which will enable them to safely care for their children. Keeping the importance of ‘reunification from day one’ in mind, practitioners need to arrange contact between the child and their parents as soon as possible after the child has come into care.

During the demands that come with this phase of intervention, think about where contact is facilitated. Use the service centre setting only if the risk is extremely high and cannot be moderated in any other way (NCCD Children’s Research Centre).

How practitioners talk about contact can influence the way a family makes sense of the situation and expectations. Instead of using the term ‘contact’ in your discussions with a parent, try talking about ‘family or connection time’ with their child to see if this helps to provide context (NCCD Children’s Research Centre). Also, rather than using the term ‘supervised contact’, discuss with the parent how Child Safety being present can support a child to be safe as well as offer coaching and guidance.

Planned, purposeful connections

To support a family to draw the most out of family connection time (contact) and move towards reunification, think about developing a proposal which reflects the worries, goals and actions identified in the case plan. 

Consider the key elements listed below in terms of the child’s needs, enabling the skill development of parents and how this time together can be used to make decisions about stability and reunification:

Take every opportunity to reinforce with parents the importance of spending time with their child. Let them know their child needs to see them being proactive in their efforts to change their behaviour and trust that this will help to bring the family back together again. Family time is a good opportunity for parents to practice and demonstrate knowledge and skills that work towards achieving their safety goals. 

Support parents to set realistic expectations and acknowledge that there will be mistakes along the way. Put mistakes in the context of learning and take the opportunity to positively influence their parenting behaviour. 

The voice of the child

Children can provide great insight into how family time is going. These views can inform the case plan and decisions around what actions are required to keep progressing towards reunification. The Three Houses Tool and The Safety House Tool are familiar tools for most practitioners and can be helpful in drawing out the child’s voice and keeping this central to the process. Use The Three Houses Tool to explore behaviours that frighten and worry the child and to explore protective factors that can shape case planning for safety. It can also help to create a picture of what needs to change for the child to feel safe and happy. Use The Safety House Tool to hear from the child about who and what can keep them safe, what rules need to be in place and how the family can get to a point where the child feels safe.

While it is important to be as flexible as possible when arranging family time, taking into account the child’s wishes and the stage of the reunification process (Wilkins and Farmer), the logistical challenges of trying to organise contact can be extremely frustrating. These frustrations can at times overshadow the importance of this time and cause practitioners to lose sight of its purpose (NCCD Children’s Research Centre). Try to reframe the frustrations and remember the benefits to a child and their parents of spending time together. It can:

• reassure the child
• maintain and nurture the relationship between a child and their parents
• enable parents to practice and demonstrate new skills in a safe setting
• provide practitioners with an opportunity to observe the relationship between a child and their parents
• allow practitioners to assess how a parent approaches parenting tasks (NCCD Children’s Research Centre).

When the primary goal is reunification, case work will have a strong focus on maximising the parents’ activities in meeting the child’s safety and care needs. When the alternative goal is long-term care, case work will still have a strong focus on maximising the parents’ activities however the carer and network will have the main role of meeting the child’s care needs. 

When developing case planning goals (both primary and alternative) and actions, it can be useful to think about the child’s care needs across different domains, such as health, education, social/recreational and cultural.  This helps to explore and define who is currently involved, what are they doing now and what could they (safely) do in the future. 

Some areas that parents can be involved in are listed below. Safety risks to the child determine a CSOs involvement.

Use the Safe Contact Tool to record the activities a parent can be involved in where there are safety concerns. This also provides the network with information about what different people can do to make sure the child is safe and work towards increasing the parents’ involvement.

Decisions

Decisions aren’t made at one point in time of a child protection intervention. Multiple decisions are made every day at every phase and are often influenced by many factors and complexities. When working towards reunification, practitioners can often struggle with knowing how long it can be before it is safe for a child to return home. The following graphic outlines some of the elements of risk and safety that must be balanced to inform decision making. Is there anything else that needs consideration?

Decisions aren’t made at one point in time of a child protection intervention. Multiple decisions are made every day at every phase and are often influenced by many factors and complexities. When working towards reunification, practitioners can often struggle with knowing how long it can be before it is safe for a child to return home. The following graphic outlines some of the elements of risk and safety that must be balanced to inform decision making. Is there anything else that needs consideration?

When working towards reunification, consider the following questions:  

• Can the child be returned home safely?
• Is reunification still viable?
• Is there an alternative permanency option if reunification is not possible?

When considering these questions, think about risk to the child, the safety of the child, and how family contact has been over the time the child is in care.

Share with parents how these factors contribute to increasing (or decreasing) the chances of reunification. For example, when thinking about contact, if a parent consistently attends and is responsive and positively engaged with their child, the likelihood of reunification is increased. Not showing up or causing harm to the child during connection time will clearly decrease the possibility of reunification. 

It is important that all stakeholders involved are on the same page regarding reunification and where things are at. If there are different narratives – for example, a parent is ready for the child to return home but the child is not – there is potential for reunification efforts to be unsuccessful. Practitioners often work with families over an extended period and in doing so, gather a wealth of information. It can be hard to sift through these details to decide when it is the right time to stop progressing reunification. Some other factors that contribute to difficulties in decision making include:

• contradictory information
• doubts about whether practitioners have a true understanding of what a parent is like
• emotional responses when things aren’t going well
• systemic pressures, such as timeframes
• differing stakeholder views
• if there is enough evidence to support decision making in court
• the gravity of making the decision to progress reunification or not.

What happens if reunification is not possible?

'Reunification can take place only after the family has had the opportunity to carry out full child care responsibilities unsupervised and overnight and only after caseworkers and the family are confident that the child is safe in those situations’ (Department of Health and Human Services (a)).

If the decision is made that a child can be safely reunified to the care of their parent, it does not mean this will happen immediately. Physical, logistical and emotional preparation must be undertaken with the child to support their transition home after being in care (NCCD Children’s Research Centre). Contact needs to gradually increase from unsupervised to overnight stays. This extended time in the family home support parents to take on more responsibility for day-to-day care tasks. The parental strengths and needs assessment and the child strengths and needs assessment can help to identify what needs attention prior to the child returning home.

If it is assessed that reunification is not possible, discuss this with the child and their parents. Be clear about what factors, information and assessments have informed this decision. Remember that responsive, regular and active interventions with a family, including home visits, meetings, observation of contact and case plan reviews, helps to ensure the direction of decision making is clear over time. In other words, honest, inclusive and proactive practice will ensure the decision not to reunify is not a surprise. Effective communication skills and unconditional positive regard can support practitioners to navigate the emotions associated with this decision and provide opportunities to look at how best to involve parents in plans to take the alternative permanency goal forward.

Post reunification support

Although reunification is considered the end goal or the preferred outcome, it is not the point at which the case can close. Returning a child home is potentially the most high-risk part of the reunification process and requires robust planning to mitigate any vulnerabilities that may lead to relapse. Help a family to understand, anticipate and respond to challenges that may arise during reunification (Wulczyn) and talk about what services can assist. Providing support once a child returns home is an opportunity to consolidate the work undertaken and is essential ensure reunification is long-lasting.

When a child goes home, they need a long-term safety and support plan which involves the safety and support network. Have conversations about the ‘what ifs?’:

• What if dad comes over and causes trouble?
• What if mum starts drinking again?
• What if mum is unwell and needs a break? 
• What if dad becomes frustrated because the child isn’t listening?

These are opportunities to involve the safety and support network.

As families adjust to a child returning home, be aware that a family under stress may find it difficult to maintain safety and stability (Farmer). Parents may experience anxiety as they try to get to know their child again and a child may test out their parent’s commitment through challenging behaviour (Wilkins and Farmer). There is often a ‘honeymoon’ period after reunification, which can be followed by a disagreement over something minor. This may surface complex and intense feelings associated with the trauma of being separated and frustration of being involved with Child Safety. Talking through these feelings is an important part of the reunification process and rather than see it as something negative, reframe it as an opportunity to talk through and acknowledge these feelings (Department of Health and Human Services (b)).

To respond to the stresses associated with reunification, post reunification support is essential to prevent a child’s re-entry in care. Consider services that will best continue to enhance parenting skills, address developmental needs of the child and connect the family to community supports. What in-home support packages can be provided to mitigate risk and support the child to return home? Think about the assessments undertaken and knowledge of the family’s needs to determine if the following services and supports may be helpful:

• housing assistance
• financial support
• transport
• drug and alcohol
• mental health
• disability
• family violence
• therapy or counselling – individual or family.

(Farmer) (Department of Health and Human Services (a))

Any post reunification services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families must be culturally safe. Partner with the parents, family, network and community to find the right options to provide ongoing support to ensure the family is visited regularly, has access to timely and specialist services and that Active Efforts are made to identify and progress changes (SNAICC (b)).

Ongoing communication and contact with the network are also an essential part of post reunification support. It is the network that will provide sustained support beyond reunification to address concerns and prevent re-entry into care. Continue to schedule regular meetings, including review meetings, where the ongoing role of the network post reunification can be discussed confirmed. Adjust your safety and support plan a required

Part of post reunification support is the formal reassessment of safety. This can help to determine the scope of Child Safety involvement and whether the family is ready to transition to longer term community supports. Once there is an assessment which supports safety and stability, and the network and support services are established, the focus of intervention can turn towards planning case closure.