THESE PRINCIPLES SHOULD GUIDE PUBLIC POLICY TOWARD FAMILIES OF CHILDREN WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES...AND THE ACTIONS OF STATES AND AGENCIES WHEN THEY BECOME INVOLVED WITH FAMILIES:
When states or agencies become involved with families, permanency planning should be a guiding philosophy. As a philosophy, permanency planning endorses childrens rights to a nurturing home and consistent relationships with adults. As a guide to state and agency practice, permanency planning requires family support, encouragement of a familys relationship with the child, family reunification for children placed out of home, and the pursuit of adoption for children when family reunification is not possible.
In short, family support services should be flexible, individualized, and designed to meet the diverse needs of families.
As a guiding principle, natural sources of support, including neighbors, extended families, friends, and community associations, should be preferred over agency programs and professional services. When states or agencies become involved with families, they should support existing social networks, strengthen natural sources of support, and help build connections to existing community resources. When natural sources of support cannot meet the needs of families, professional or agency-operated support services should be available.
Family support services must be based on the assumption that families, rather than states and agencies, are in the best position to determine their needs.
Family support services should be defined broadly in terms of the needs of the entire family, including children with disabilities, parents, and siblings.
Family support services should be designed to maximize integration and participation in community life for children with disabilities.
Consistent with the philosophy of permanency planning, children should live with their families whenever possible. When, due to family crisis or other circumstances, children must leave their families, efforts should be directed at encouraging and enabling families to be reunited.
In fulfillment of each childs right to a stable family and an enduring relationship with one or more adults, adoption should be pursued for children whose ties with their families have been broken. Whenever possible, families should be involved in adoption planning and, in all cases, should be treated with sensitivity and respect. When adoption is pursued, the possibility of open adoption, whereby families maintain involvement with a child, should be seriously considered.
After families and adoptive families, children should have the opportunity to live with foster families. Foster family care can provide children with a home atmosphere and warm relationships and is preferable to group settings and other placements. As a state or agency sponsored program, however, foster care seldom provides children the continuity and stability they need in their lives. While foster families may be called upon to assist, support, and occasionally fill in for families, foster care is not likely to be an acceptable alternative to fulfilling each childs right to a stable home and enduring relationships.
Center on Human Policy, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 1987/88
Return to previous page
Published on the Web site of the Institute on Community Integration, University of Minnesota (http://ici.umn.edu) Citation: Rosenau, N. (2000). Do We Really Mean Families for All Children? Permanency Planning for Children with Developmental Disabilities. Policy Research Brief (University of Minnesota: Minneapolis, Institute on Community Integration), 11(2).
Published on the Web site of the Institute on Community Integration, University of Minnesota (http://ici.umn.edu)
Citation: Rosenau, N. (2000). Do We Really Mean Families for All Children? Permanency Planning for Children with Developmental Disabilities. Policy Research Brief (University of Minnesota: Minneapolis, Institute on Community Integration), 11(2).