Process and Outcomes of Family Group Decision Making

Jones Loring
School of Social Work
San Diego State Unviersity
5500 Campanile Dr.
San Diego CA 92182
USA
Phone: 619-594-6508
FAX: 619-594-5991
Email: ljones@mail.sdsu.edu
 
The Family Group Decision Making (FGDM) is a new approach to decision making in child welfare that seeks to have social workers take a collaborative rather than an adversarial stance with families (Merkel-Holguin, 1996). The assertions from advocates of the method are that FGDM results in a reduction of violence, and in fewer children living in-out-home-care. (American Humane Association, 1998).  The advocates admit that data is lacking that would support these claims of benefit.
 
Data for this study were derived from the review of case files (N=747) in a public CPS agency. System and family outcomes were compared for families who received a FGDM and families receiving the usual standard of care. A subset of the FGDM sample (N=50) were interviewed pre and post meeting.
 
Only 38% of children were placed with a parent after a meeting, but 82 % of children were placed with a family member suggesting the method encourages use of family resources. A post-meeting one year follow-up found the rates of abuse referrals were lower for FGDM families than the non-FGDM participants, but only at a level that approached significance (p<.077).
 
Social workers and families concerns stated prior to the meeting diverged. Families were more concerned with financial issues and child behavior than were the social workers. Social workers were more concerned with CPS issues and the parent behavior than were the family. Social workers goals stated prior to the meeting were the strongest predictor of meeting outcomes. Maternal relatives were more likely to participate in meetings than paternal relatives, and the presence of female maternal relatives predicted placement with the family.
 
Interview data found no change in the Family environment or in the amount of depressive symptoms expressed by caretakers after the intervention. The implications of findings for practice are discussed.