Engaging Clients in Family and Child Service
Successfully
engaging clients in the helping process is an important task for social work
practitioners. There is a close association with the development of helping relationship
and positive treatment results (Shrik & Karver, 2003, as cited in Gladstone
et al., 2012). A study conducted at ‘Vancouver Family Preservation and
Reunification Services’ by Gockel et al., (2008) found that successful social
work interventions can create a nurturing environment for children in families.
The study further says that healthy worker-client relationship can create a
critical awareness about attitudes, beliefs, behaviours and values of both
parties. This awareness would possibly help families to take initiatives for
change and engage in the helping process successfully. I argue that the way
families perceive the relationship with a worker in the family and child
services is influencing and shaping the views of the family about the intervention
and process. Families involved in the welfare system are often faced multiple
challenges includes, “poverty”, “single parenthood”, “violence”, “substance
abuse” and/or “mental and physical disabilities” (Gockel, 2008 p.98). These
families are also facing a traumatic demoralizing due to the frequent
experience of state intervention. Literatures (Russel, Haris, Gockel, &
Jessel, 2004; Guterman, 2001; Kapp & Propp, 2002) articulates that due to
the experience of frequent state intervention and fear of adverse consequences;
the families are reluctant to cooperate with further services and can be
defensive of providing information about the family and their parenting.
The effectiveness of social work
interventions are depends on the full and complete participation of the client.
According to Dawson & Berry (2002) participation of the clients can be in two
ways, “collaboration” and “compliance” (p.296). Collaboration consists of
participation and agreement of the service plan, and compliances are the
behaviour of the client such as maintaining the appointments, cooperate with
agency and worker, and achieving tasks. Collaboration and compliance are very
important in client engagement.
As a primary level engaging, a “non
judgemental acceptance” is significant, regardless the responds and initial
attitude of the clients (Gockel et al., 2008, p.99). Dawson &
Berry (2002) explains that assisting families to define their own problems and
providing emotional support by actively pay attention to clients will help both
parties to set their goals without difficulty. Responses of the worker towards
the family’s experiences are also important. Each family is unique, and each
parent responding to their children differently. Worker should recognize the
uniqueness of the family and develop an individual responsive approach in a
flexible manner. A strength-based intervention can contribute to successful engagement
of clients in family and child services. Identify and appreciate the skills and
efforts of the family as well as children. Recognize the parenting challenges
and assist them to find own best possible solutions.
As a secondary engaging strategy, the worker should exhibit
a “sense of empathy” and make clear understanding about the various
interlocking problems facing by the clients. Client’s own previous personal,
social and structural oppressive experience needs to be explored to establish a
meaningful relationship with the client. Gockel et al., (2008) argues that
client respect the worker’s capacity and expertise to deal with the issues.
This attitude will positively influence the effectiveness of intervention.
Being flexible and honest to the clients would possibly bring confidence among
service users about the intervention. Workers
can build trust by targeting on the real problem rather than individual’s
shortcomings. Also demonstrate integrity and openness; motivate clients to
follow the action plan and recommendations.
A democratic use of power in the intervention
process will create immense changes in the worker-client relationship. Invite
clients to all possible situations to participate in the decision making
process. Make awareness about the entire process and empower them by providing
all related information and options. Strega & Carriere (2009) argues that
clients have the right to know about what is doing for them by the worker and
how; in any case, worker should maintain transparency and provide ample
opportunity to the clients to involve in the process without fear of worker’s
power. Worker needs to respect the boundaries of the rights that clients have
as a family and/or a parent. An autocratic approach can affect the confidence
of the client and feel despair and powerlessness.
As a
strategic approach assist clients to enhance their existing skills and develop
new skills. It will help them to manage their life situations and address their
needs effectively. As Strega and Carriere (2009 p.19) explains, the
practitioners should recognize the stress and pain of the client encountering
“ongoing impacts of colonialism” and “capitalism” in their day-to-day
life. Study conducted by Gockel et al.,
(2008) illustrates that clients those who acquired knowledge and skills to
effectively manage their daily life with the support of a worker demonstrates
incredible change in their parenting capacity and problem solving skills.
Skills
and experience of the worker play a vital role in engaging clients in family and
child services. Gladstone et al., (2012) found that families involved in the welfare
system valued the skill and experience of the workers. Families assumed that
experienced workers are able to understand diverse family problems. The same
study correspondingly states that the experience is helping workers too, to
understand and deal with diverse family problems in a better way. However, there
is a relationship between the worker’s perception of family engagement and
family’s insight of their own involvement in the helping process. Further
understanding is that, client engagement is the process of setting goals
collaboratively based on mutual acceptance and trust.
References
Davies, L. (2004). ‘The
difference between child abuse and child protection could be you’: creating a
community network of protective adults. Child Abuse Review, 13(6), 426-432. doi:10.1002/car.872
Dawson, K., & Berry,
M. (2002). Engaging Families in Child Welfare Services: An Evidence-Based
Approach to Best Practice. Child Welfare, 81(2), 293-317.
Dumbrill, G. C. (2006a).
Parental experience of child protection intervention: A qualitative study. Child Abuse & Neglect, 30(1), 27-37.
doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.08.012
Dumbrill,
G.C (2006b). Ontario’s child welfare transformation: another swing of the
pendulum? Canadian Social Work Review. 23(1-2),
5-19.
Gladstone, J., Dumbrill,
G., Leslie, B., Koster, A., Young, M., & Ismaila, A. (2012). Looking at
engagement and outcome from the perspectives of child protection workers and
parents. Children & Youth Services Review, 34(1), 112-118.
doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.09.003
Gockel,
A., Russell, M., & Harris, B. (2008). Recreating Family: Parents Identify
Worker-Client Relationships as Paramount in Family Preservation Programs. Child Welfare, 87(6), 91-113.
Magnuson,
D., Patten, N., & Looysen, K. (2012). Negotiation as a style in child
protection work. Child & Family Social Work, 17(3), 296-305.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-2206.2011.00780.x
Strega Susan and Jeannine
Carrière (Eds.). (2009). Walking this path together: anti-racist and
anti-oppressive child welfare practice. Halifax, NS: Fernwood
Publishing.
No comments:
Post a Comment