Coping with Adversity in the Lives of Children in Foster Care

Open access

Abstract

Introduction:The theoretical-empirical study is based on two particular case studies of families bringing up children from institutional care. It deals with the real needs of foster families, with the foster parents’ perception of fostering and their experiences from the time spent with children in foster care, about the children’s behaviour in adverse situations, which the foster parents must deal with in the period of the child’s adaptation to the new environment of their households. The authors accentuate the importance of communication and emotional education from the aspect of personality development of children placed into new families. These children should be prepared for moving from a known into an unknown environment. In the conclusions, the authors give several specific recommendations within the framework of semantic categories dealt with in the chapters and subchapters of the study.

Methods:The study is based on a theoretical analysis of the presented issues. For the purposes of the research, the following research methods were used

- Content analysis of official documents (job description of social workers in foster family care).

- Case studies of two clients of the offices of Social and Legal Protection of Children and Social Curatorship in the field offices of Central Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family in Nitra and Bratislava Self-Governing Regions carried out in 2018.

- Logical operations - analysis, synthesis, comparison.

- Interviews with foster carers (Family 1 and Family 2) carried out throughout the whole year 2018.

- Generalization in semantic categories which, at the same time, are the titles of the chapters and subchapters bellow, and also in the conclusions and recommendations for foster care and the social practice.

Results:For personal development, children need relationships with others. Maternal and paternal love, and care are the basic elements of these relationships - as confirmed in the interviews with foster parents. Alongside with biological parenthood, the so-called “psychological parenthood” has an important role to play. The role of a psychological parent can be filled by the members of own (i.e. biological) family as well as by adoptive parents, foster parents, the biological parents’ partners (stepmothers and stepfathers) and - under certain conditions - also by personnel in facilities of social care. Their psychological needs and the extent of their satisfaction determine what they will experience and how they will feel.

Discussion:It is important to prepare parents to accept the fact that foster parenthood is different from biological parenthood. Prospective foster parents often come to the offices of Social and Legal Protection of Children and Social Curatorship with the opinion that not even biological parents are being prepared for their parental roles. Foster parents already having biological children argue - as it follows from the interviews carried out throughout the research - that they are experienced parents and, so, they can bring up foster children as well. They do not realize that foster children bring something new that biological children have never experienced. Biological and foster parenthood are definitely not the same.

Conclusions:In the conclusions, the authors point out that children in foster care identify with their parents’ values and opinions. For children who have faced significant adversity in their lives, it is beneficial if the family environment and education are harmonious. Such good conditions can have a positive impact on the children’s entire future lives. In the process of adaptation, the whole network of relationships within the family must be re-structuralized, which requires well-prepared family members.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Act No. 305/2005 on Social and Legal Protection of Children and Social Curatorship.

  • Act No. 36/2005 on Family and on Amendment of Some Other Acts.

  • Better Care Network. (2013). Transforming services for children without parents: A decade of EU Daphne projects in collaboration with the WHO Regional Office for Europe. Retrieved from http://www.bettercarenetwork.org/library/the-continuum-of-care/residentialcare/united-kingdom-a-decade-of-european-union-eu-daphne-projects-incollaboration-with-the-world-health.

  • Cimprichová Gežová K. (2015). Fathers’ and mothers’ roles and their particularities in raising children. Acta Technologica Dubnicae 5(1) 45-50. doi 10.1515/atd-2015-0032

  • Crawford T. N. Cohen P. R. Chen H. Anglin D. M. & Ehrensaft M. (2009). Early maternal separation and the trajectory of borderline personality disorder symptoms. Development and Psychopathology 21(3)1013-1030. doi: 10.1017/S0954579409000546

  • Del Barrio V. Aluja A. & Garcia L. (2004). Relationship between empathy and the Big Five personality traits in a sample of Spanish adolescents. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal32(7) 677-681. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2004.32.7.677

  • Evans G. W (2006). Child development and the physical environment. Annual Review of Psychology57 423-451. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190057

  • García L. F. Aluja A. & Del Barrio V. (2006). Effects of personality rearing styles and social values on adolescents’ socialisation process. Personality and Individual Differences 40(8) 1671-1682.

  • Gondová M. (1994). Bez citovej výchovy je rodinná výchova neúplná. Rodina a škola 41(7) 18-19.

  • Hanuliaková J. & Barnová S. (2015). Positive school climate (A theoretical empirical conspectus). Acta Technologica Dubnicae 5(1) 68-73. doi:10.1515/atd-2015-003

  • Hedge M. N. & Davis D. (2005). Multicultural issues in clinical practicum. In M. N. Hedge & D. Davis Clinical Methods and Practicum in Speech-Language Pathology (pp. 191-218). CliftonPark: Thomson Delmar Learning.

  • Holúbek J. (1995a). Citová výchova v škole a v rodine. Rodina a škola 42(10) 14-15.

  • Holúbek J. (1995b). Výchova disciplinovaného dieťaťa. Rodina a škola 42(3) 14-15.

  • Choate J. S. & SCHVEEN D. C. (2004). Special needs of diverse learners. In J. S. Choate (Ed.) Succesful inclusive teaching. Boston: Pearson education.

  • Ikhart P. & Szobiová E. (2018). Parenting styles and mental health of adolescents. In E. Gajdošová et al. (Eds.) Duševné zdravie a welbeing virtuálnej generácie (pp. 64-78). Bratislava: Ipčko.

  • Kerekešová M. (2007). Pevne objímať majú rodičia nie terapeut. Nebyť sám 4(1) 12.

  • Kósová T. (2015). Sociálno-výchovná starostlivosť rodiny a mimorodinného života (diploma thesis). Dubnica nad Váhom: DTI University.

  • Lahe D. (2011). Research on abouse and violence against the elderly in a family setting. In Acta Technologica Dubnicae 1(2) 16-28. doi: 10.1515/atd-2015-0042

  • Lauková E. (2007). Komunikácia o potrebách aj pocitoch je dôležitá. Nebyť sám. 4(3) 4-5.

  • Lawrence C. R. Carlson E. A. & Egeland B. (2006). The impact of foster care on development. Development and Psychopathology18(1) 57-76. doi: 10.1017/S0954579406060044

  • Madro M. (2018). Possibilities of psychological intervention on social networks. Acta Educationis Generalis 8(3) 35-49. doi: 10.2478/atd-2018-0016

  • Mareš J. (2017). Prosocial behavior education in children. Acta Educationis Generalis 7(2) 7-16. doi: 10.1515/atd-2017-0009

  • Matej V. et al. (2000). Profesionálny rodič alebo guľatá kocka. Sprievodca profesionálnou náhradnou výchovou v rodine. Bratislava: OZN.

  • Matějček Z. & Dytrych Z. (1998). Desatero pro náhradní rodiče. Náhradní rodinná péče 2 35-36.

  • Morrissey T. W. (2009). Multiple child-care arrangements and young children’s behavioral outcomes. Child Development 80(1) 59-76. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01246.x

  • Porubčanová D. (2015). Emócie "uvarené" v škole. In Kuchárska kniha pre život alebo Cesty edukácie pre život (pp. 302-315). Dubnica nad Váhom: DTI.

  • Potočárová M. (1999a). Čo ovplyvňuje úspešnú výchovu v rodine. Rodina a škola47(3) 10.

  • Potočárová M. (1999b). Rezervované rodičom a ich dospievajúcim deťom. Rodina a škola 47(6) 10.

  • Priehradná D. (2006). Adaptácia - radosť a bolesť. Nebyť sám3(1) 6-18.

  • Roháček M. Priehradná D. Matejová R. & Matej V. (1998). Zvykáme si jeden na druhého alebo nová náhradná rodina v procese adaptácie. Bratislava: OZN.

  • Roháček M. & Matej V. (2005). Hľadáme rodičov ale aj opustené deti potrebujú rodinu. Bratislava: OZN.

  • Rostańska E. (2012). Conversation between child and adults as educational experience. Acta Technologica Dubnicae 2(2) 52-56. doi: 10.1515/atd-2015-0060

  • Rozvadský Gugová G. (2018). Styles of attachment determined by the Slovak version of sEMBU. Acta Educationis Generalis 8(2) 82-88. doi: 10.2478/atd-2018-0014

  • Rozvadský Gugová G. & Heretik A. (2011). Gender differences in attachment styles using sersion of the Experiences in Close Relationships - Revised (ECR-R). Acta Technologica Dubnicae1(2) 29-36. doi: 10.1515/atd-2015-0043

  • Schavel M. & Drexlerová B. (2006). Niekoľko poznámok k sociálnemu poradenstvu v oblasti náhradnej rodinnej starostlivosti. Sociální práce1 64-70.

  • Škrabánková J. & Martínková M. (2018). Giftedness as a possible risk of bullying. Acta Educationis Generalis 8(3) 69-93. doi: 10.2478/atd-2018-0018.

  • Škoviera A. (2007). Trendy náhradnej výchovy. Bratislava: Petrus.

  • Tamášová V. (2007). Teória a prax rodinnej edukácie (2nd edition). Bratislava: AXIMA.

  • Winkler J. & Šporcrová I. (2003). Potřeby dítěte a náhradní výchovní péče. Sociální práce/Sociálna práca 21 54-70.

  • Zelina M. (1994). Výchovné štýly. Rodina a škola 41(8) 7.

Search
Journal information
Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 194 194 9
PDF Downloads 120 120 4