Abstract
This article highlights issues involved in carrying out evaluations for termination of parental rights cases and suggests caution for mental health professionals doing such evaluations. It argues that current models of parenting that come from the child development and child maltreatment fields are too narrow in their focus to act as a foundation for such evaluations and are often based on research with select groups in our society making them open to bias. Similarly, it is argued that traditional assessment measures are limited in their utility for responding to the kinds of relational and basic care questions asked in such evaluations. A functional-contextual model is offered as an alternative with examples of potentially useful measurement strategies. With such a frame as a starting point, the field might progress to providing more useful information to courts. Future research directions to improve this practice arena are discussed.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 77-100 |
| Number of pages | 24 |
| Journal | Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review |
| Volume | 1 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jan 1 1998 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
- Education
- Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Clinical Psychology
- Psychiatry and Mental health
Cite this
}
The evaluation of parental fitness in termination of parental rights cases : A functional-contextual perspective. / Azar, Sandra T.; Lauretti, Allison F.; Loding, Bruce V.
In: Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, Vol. 1, No. 2, 01.01.1998, p. 77-100.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - The evaluation of parental fitness in termination of parental rights cases
T2 - A functional-contextual perspective
AU - Azar, Sandra T.
AU - Lauretti, Allison F.
AU - Loding, Bruce V.
PY - 1998/1/1
Y1 - 1998/1/1
N2 - This article highlights issues involved in carrying out evaluations for termination of parental rights cases and suggests caution for mental health professionals doing such evaluations. It argues that current models of parenting that come from the child development and child maltreatment fields are too narrow in their focus to act as a foundation for such evaluations and are often based on research with select groups in our society making them open to bias. Similarly, it is argued that traditional assessment measures are limited in their utility for responding to the kinds of relational and basic care questions asked in such evaluations. A functional-contextual model is offered as an alternative with examples of potentially useful measurement strategies. With such a frame as a starting point, the field might progress to providing more useful information to courts. Future research directions to improve this practice arena are discussed.
AB - This article highlights issues involved in carrying out evaluations for termination of parental rights cases and suggests caution for mental health professionals doing such evaluations. It argues that current models of parenting that come from the child development and child maltreatment fields are too narrow in their focus to act as a foundation for such evaluations and are often based on research with select groups in our society making them open to bias. Similarly, it is argued that traditional assessment measures are limited in their utility for responding to the kinds of relational and basic care questions asked in such evaluations. A functional-contextual model is offered as an alternative with examples of potentially useful measurement strategies. With such a frame as a starting point, the field might progress to providing more useful information to courts. Future research directions to improve this practice arena are discussed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032081878&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032081878&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1023/A:1021883611965
DO - 10.1023/A:1021883611965
M3 - Article
VL - 1
SP - 77
EP - 100
JO - Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
JF - Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review
SN - 1096-4037
IS - 2
ER -