Assessing The Relationship Between The Quality Of Juvenile Dependency Hearings And Foster Care Placements

• Author: Stephanie Macgill,Alicia Summers
• Date: 01 October 2014
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12120
• Published date: 01 October 2014

ADDITIONAL ARTICLES

ASSESSING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE QUALITY

OF JUVENILE DEPENDENCY HEARINGS AND FOSTER

CARE PLACEMENTS1

Stephanie Macgill and Alicia Summers

The current study examines the relationship between three hearing quality indicators—depth of discussion, judicial inquiry,and

judicial engagement of parents—and placement outcomes for maltreated children and youth at early case hearings (i.e.,

preliminary protective and adjudication hearings). We find that higher levels of judicial engagement of parents during

preliminary protective hearings was significantly related to increased placements with relatives and decreased placements in

nonrelative foster care. Levels of judicial inquiry and hearing discussion had no apparent effect on wherechildren were placed

during preliminary protective hearings. The implications of these findings and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Key Point for the Family Court Community:

• This study deepens current understanding of the ways in which three juvenile dependency hearing quality indicators

relate to foster care placement outcomes.

Keywords: Child Welfare;Foster Care Hearings;Judicial Engagement;Juvenile Dependency;and Juvenile Dependency

Hearing Quality.

The decisions of juvenile dependency judges, as gatekeepers to the child welfare system, set

standards for how communities respond to child abuse and neglect (cf. Edwards, 1992; Miller,1999).

Indeed, the juvenile dependency judge is not merely an arbiter of a dispute, but s/he determines the

direction for state intervention on behalf of abused and neglected children and is responsible for

holding the entire system accountable for the safety of the children who come before the court

(National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges [NCJFCJ], 1995). In many instances of child

maltreatment, it is in the best interest of the child to temporarily place the child in foster care while

the safety threats at home are ameliorated. However, the decision to remove a child from his/her home

is not to be taken lightly.

Furthermore, research has shown that children who spend time in foster care tend to experience

poorer outcomes such as substance abuse (Thompson & Auslander, 2007), unemployment

(Macomber et al., 2008), homelessness (Yen, Hammond, & Kushel, 2009), teen pregnancy (Dworsky

& DeCoursey,2009), lower educational attainment (Pecora et al., 2006; Trout, Hagaman, Casey,Reid,

& Epstein, 2008), and mental health issues (Blome, Shields, & Verdieck,2009). Alumni of foster care

are significantly more likely to commit crimes, drop out of school, receive public assistance, have

substance abuse problems, and experience homelessness than children who were not placed in foster

care (Clausen, Landsverk, Ganger, Chadwick, & Litrownik, 1998; Courtney, Dworsky, Lee, & Raap,

2010; Courtney, Piliavin, Grogan-Kaylor, & Nesmith, 2001; Doyle, 2008; Pecora et al., 2010).

Lawrence et al. (2006) found that foster care relates to an increase in behavior problems that continue

after the child exits foster care. While it is important to note that many of the difficulties children and

youth face in and after foster care may be due to maltreatment they have experienced and not

necessarily their experience in foster care (Samuels, 2011), the fact remains that foster care itself can

have negative effects for some children.

FAMILY COURT REVIEW, Vol. 52 No. 4, October 2014 678–685

© 2014 Association of Familyand Conciliation Cour ts