Discussion and Implications for Practice
The purpose of this study is to understand whether state-sanctioned caretaker relationships endure among adolescents who exit foster care through adoption, subsidized guardianship, or long-term relative foster care. From the perspectives of young adults who experience these diverse foster care exits, it explored the complexity involved in the translation of legal permanence to relational permanence, with the aim of producing a theoretically grounded classification of relational permanence as a means to inform child welfare practice and policy related to permanence.
The author notes that the study’s small non-random sample may not be representative of the larger population of older youth who exit foster care through legal permanence or long-term relative foster care. Nevertheless, efforts were taken to achieve a sample that reflected the experiences of older youth who get adopted or enter guardianship or long-term relative foster care. A single-perspective design was used to captures the viewpoints of young adults regarding their relationships and experiences with their caretakers. While this is an under-researched perspective, understanding relationships in all their complexity requires insight from the multiple actors that shape relationships, for example, the non-parental caretakers themselves, biological parents and family members, and service providers within the child welfare system. Despite these limitations, the studied young adults’ challenge the current framework for pursuing legal permanence among older adolescents who are unable to be reunified with their birth families. …show more content…
Their stories exemplify the complexity and nuance involved in the translation of legal permanence to relational permanence. The four emergent conceptual relational permanence categories (i.e., enduring, ambivalent, spurned, and severed) are useful ways of understanding the translation of legal permanence to relational permanence for older youth. These particular categories provide a framework for child welfare practitioners to assess relational permanence before and after legal permanence. Furthermore, these four categories with their suggesting that legal permanence has unintended consequences as a sole policy and practice focus, and aligns with existing research that calls for child welfare agencies to increase their focus on relational permanence (Bellamy, 2008; Cushing et al., 2014). Thus, we should not be under any illusion that achieving relational permanence is not merely a function of biological relationships or type of legal permanence experienced. Rather, as the interview data revealed, the five key relational dimensions—feeling loved by caretakers, perceived caretaker commitment, openness to biological family, sense of belonging, and received caretaker support—that may be the foundation on which relational permanence is built. Importantly, rather than developing as a result of a legal permanency outcome, the data suggest that these key relational dimensions ideally should precede the establishment of legal permanence for relational permanence to be attained and ultimately endure. These five relational are similar to constructs of relational permanence identified by existing research (Brown et al., 2006; Cushing et …show more content…
As with previous research, this study finds that the various components of relational permanence are not mutually exclusive. Young adults reported a combination of relational factors in their relationships with their caretakers. The diversity of young adults’ experiences and the patterns of these experiences demonstrate that these five relational factors work in tandem to create the quality of relational experience (such as enduring or ambivalent). In this study, legal permanence leads to enduring relational permanence only when all five or four of the five relational factors are
The purpose of this study is to understand whether state-sanctioned caretaker relationships endure among adolescents who exit foster care through adoption, subsidized guardianship, or long-term relative foster care. From the perspectives of young adults who experience these diverse foster care exits, it explored the complexity involved in the translation of legal permanence to relational permanence, with the aim of producing a theoretically grounded classification of relational permanence as a means to inform child welfare practice and policy related to permanence.
The author notes that the study’s small non-random sample may not be representative of the larger population of older youth who exit foster care through legal permanence or long-term relative foster care. Nevertheless, efforts were taken to achieve a sample that reflected the experiences of older youth who get adopted or enter guardianship or long-term relative foster care. A single-perspective design was used to captures the viewpoints of young adults regarding their relationships and experiences with their caretakers. While this is an under-researched perspective, understanding relationships in all their complexity requires insight from the multiple actors that shape relationships, for example, the non-parental caretakers themselves, biological parents and family members, and service providers within the child welfare system. Despite these limitations, the studied young adults’ challenge the current framework for pursuing legal permanence among older adolescents who are unable to be reunified with their birth families. …show more content…
Their stories exemplify the complexity and nuance involved in the translation of legal permanence to relational permanence. The four emergent conceptual relational permanence categories (i.e., enduring, ambivalent, spurned, and severed) are useful ways of understanding the translation of legal permanence to relational permanence for older youth. These particular categories provide a framework for child welfare practitioners to assess relational permanence before and after legal permanence. Furthermore, these four categories with their suggesting that legal permanence has unintended consequences as a sole policy and practice focus, and aligns with existing research that calls for child welfare agencies to increase their focus on relational permanence (Bellamy, 2008; Cushing et al., 2014). Thus, we should not be under any illusion that achieving relational permanence is not merely a function of biological relationships or type of legal permanence experienced. Rather, as the interview data revealed, the five key relational dimensions—feeling loved by caretakers, perceived caretaker commitment, openness to biological family, sense of belonging, and received caretaker support—that may be the foundation on which relational permanence is built. Importantly, rather than developing as a result of a legal permanency outcome, the data suggest that these key relational dimensions ideally should precede the establishment of legal permanence for relational permanence to be attained and ultimately endure. These five relational are similar to constructs of relational permanence identified by existing research (Brown et al., 2006; Cushing et …show more content…
As with previous research, this study finds that the various components of relational permanence are not mutually exclusive. Young adults reported a combination of relational factors in their relationships with their caretakers. The diversity of young adults’ experiences and the patterns of these experiences demonstrate that these five relational factors work in tandem to create the quality of relational experience (such as enduring or ambivalent). In this study, legal permanence leads to enduring relational permanence only when all five or four of the five relational factors are