You are on page 1of 22

The Four Cornerstones of Evidence-Based Practice in Action:

The Development of an Adoptive Parent Self-Survey and a Structured Interview Guide

Jane F. Gilgun

University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

Susan Keskinen,

St. Paul, MN

Brandi Hill

Laurie Karp

Samantha Sherman

University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

running head: adoptive parenting

The Readiness to Adopt Self-Survey (RASS) is available at


http://www.scribd.com/doc/19650386/Readiness-to-Adopt-Children-with-Special-Needs

The manual for the RASS is available at


http://www.scribd.com/doc/22159852/Readiness-to-Adopt-Children-with-Special-Needs-
User-Manual

Paper presented at the annual conference, National Council on Family Relations,


Orlando, Florida, November 22, 2004. Jane F. Gilgun, Ph.D., LICSW, is professor, School of
Social Work, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, 1404 Gortner Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108:
Phone: 612/925-3569; e-mail: jgilgun@umn.edu. Brandi Hill, Laurie Karp, and Samantha
Sherman are master’s degree students at the School of Social Work, Univeristy of Minnesota,
Twin Cities; Susan Keskinen, MSW, is a consultant, 691 Portland Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55104.
skeskinen@yahoo.com. This conference paper was peer, blind reviewed.
ABSTRACT

This paper presents two newly developed instruments to be used in adoption practice: The

Readiness to Adopt Self-Survey (RASS) and the Guided to Conversations with Prospective

Adoptive Parents (Guide). Both tools are to be used with parents who are thinking about

adopting children with special needs. The items of the tools parallel each other and are meant to

be used consecutively. First, prospective adoptive parents complete the RASS in their own time

and at their own pace. Then, adoption professionals interview the parents on the same items as

are on the RASS. The development of the tools is an application of the principles of evidence-

based practice which rests upon four cornerstones: best research evidence, clinical expertise,

client values, experiences, and preferences, and the personal and professional values and

experiences of practitioners.
The Four Cornerstones of Evidence-Based Practice in Action:

The Development of an Adoptive Parent Self-Survey and a Structured Interview Guide

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is having a remarkable influence in such fields as family

studies, family therapy, family life education, social work, child development, and the various

health disciplines such as nursing, medicine, psychiatry, public health, and geriatrics. Medicine

is the parent discipline of EBP, and medical practitioners have defined EBM as consisting of

three element: best research evidence, clinical expertise, and patient preferences, values, and

experiences. A group of medical practitioners advocate for the inclusion of the person of the

physician as a fourth element, suggesting that physician values, preferences, and worldviews

shape how they practice medicine. The first author recently concluded that EBP in social work

and other applied disciplines consists of these four elements, which she calls the four

cornerstones of evidence-based practice (Gilgun, 2005c).

How to practice within evidence-based frameworks is under wide-spread discussion. For

instance, Patterson et al (2004) discussed possible applications of EBP to marital and family

therapy, Singh & Oswald (2004) published a two-part series on one approach to work with

children and families using principles of EBP, and Qureshi (2004) discussed the range of

meanings of the term evidence. Such discussions show the flexibility and fluidity of the

applications of EBP to various applied disciplines.

The present paper provides yet another application of ideas from EBP. We based the

development of two tools to be used in adoption practice—the Readiness to Adopt Self-Survey

(RASS) and the Guide to Conversations with Prospective Adoptive Parents--on the four

cornerstones of EBP. Specifically, the RASS and the Guide are based on research and theory

(best research evidence) qualitative interviews that we conducted with adoption professionals
(clinical expertise), and qualitative interviews that we conducted with adoptive parents (client

preferences, values, and experiences).

We assumed that our own values, worldviews, and experiences influenced what we

identified as meaningful from within these three sources of items and ideas (the person of the

practitioner). For example, three of the five authors worked in the adoption field for a total of

about 32 years and two drew upon their experiences as parents. We hoped that our personal

meanings were diverse enough to ensure that important areas related to adoptive parenting are

covered in the tools. Related articles demonstrate the development of clinical assessment tools

for work with children and families based on the four cornerstones (Gilgun, 2005a, 2004).

The RASS, as its title states, is a self-survey designed to help prospective adoptive

parents reflect upon their willingness and capacities to parent adoptive children with special

needs and to identify parents’ strengths as well as areas that require their further attention. We

recommend that prospective adoptive parents discuss their responses with partners and with

other significant persons in their family and social networks, especially the children already in

their homes.

The Guide to Conversations with Prospective Adoptive Parents (Guide) is a structured

interview that parallels the topics in the RASS. Adoption professionals conduct this interview

after parents have completed the RASS and have discussed their responses with significant

others. Adoption professionals can offer parents support, counsel, and referral for trainings and

other forms of self-development to prepare parents for welcoming children with special needs

into their families.

Drafts of the first tools are completed. We are now planning on testing them for

usefulness and relevance and for their reliabilities and validity. The present paper is a report on

their development and the thought on which the tools are based.

Adopted Children with Special Needs


Since the passage of the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) of 1997, the number of

foster children placed for adoption from public social service agencies has almost doubled, from

28,000 to 51,000 (Testa, 2004). Despite this, the numbers of children eligible for adoption far

exceeds those who are placed. For instance, as many as 128,000 children were eligible and in

foster care in 1999. These children, sometimes called “children who are left behind,” tend to be

children of color who on average are a few years older than children who are adopted (Green,

2003), and they often have more serious behavioral, emotional, and medical issues than children

who have been placed in adoptive homes. In December 2003, President Bush signed into law the

Adoption Promotion Act of 2003, which extended a bonus program to state and county agencies

for each special needs adoption they facilitate. This extension will likely result in a continuation

of the increase in the numbers of adoptions of children with special needs.

The term children with special needs has many meanings but in general indicates

children with behavioral and emotional issues that are far more challenging than typical parents

have capacities for meeting (Terlin-Watt, 2001). Other characteristics of children with special

needs include health conditions that require specialized care, sibling groups, children with

histories of abuse and neglect, child exposed to drugs, alcohol, and other toxic substances

prenatally, older children, and children of color (Bower & Laws, 2002: Green, 2003; Reilly &

Paltz, 2003; Rosenthal & Groze, 1992).

Based on experiences within adoptive families, the North American Council on

Adoptable Children (n. d.) (http://www.nacac.org) recommended that another characteristic be

added to descriptors of special needs children: children who are at risk to develop behavioral,

emotional, or physical challenges resulting from the social, psychiatric, and medical histories of

their parents (North American Council on Adoptable Children, n.d., http://www.nacac.org). At

birth and sometimes in early childhood, these children may not show the social, psychiatric, and

medical conditions documented in their parents’ histories, but such histories suggest the need for

increased medical and psychological care, such as periodic neurological exams, to ensure their
continued healthy functioning. As Reilly and Platz (2003) found, the challenging behaviors that

adopted children show may not appear until years after the placement. Examples are fetal

alcohol spectrum effects and childhood mental illnesses whose symptoms may not be evident at

birth but appear over time

Children who are considered special needs typically have more than one of these

characteristics and present challenges to adoptive families. Research and professional

experience have documented the higher likelihood of adoption disruptions among children of

special needs than among children who have a conventional status (Leung & Erich, 2002). Given

the challenges these children present to adoptive families, adoption professionals throughout the

country have a sense of urgency to recruit and prepare prospective adoptive parents who can

respond to these children effectively and thus provide these children with permanency, love, and

a sense of belonging to family and to communities that we believe is the birthright of every child.

Our professional experiences in special needs adoption have taught us a great deal about

children with special needs. These children have varied life experiences that typically include

trauma; that is, life events that overwhelm their capacities to cope with, adapt to, or overcome

the effects of these events. In addition, many children with special needs have neurological

issues that may result in emotional and behavioral difficulties. Physical limitations such as

cerebral palsy and learning disabilities are common.

Other experiences typical to these children include witnessing domestic violence,

being the targets of abuse and neglect themselves, and suffering the death of one or both parents,

often in tragic circumstances, such as murder or drug overdoses. Children sometimes witness the

murder of their parents or other murders, such as those when drug deals go wrong.

Abuse and neglect and other adversities can affect children’s behaviors and functioning if

they have not received help from adults to cope with, adapt to, or overcome the effects of these

negative life events (Gilgun, 2005a). For instance, children who have been sexually abused may

have problems with bowel and bladder control, act out sexually, or touch other children
inappropriately. There is some research evidence that children who act out sexually are

particularly difficult for adoptive families to parent, and therefore disruption rates are very high

for these children (Sandmeier, 1988; Smith & Howard, 1994). Children who have been

neglected often have difficult issues, such as food issues that can include eating until they vomit,

hoarding food, stealing sugar items, not eating or being very picky eaters.

Many special needs children have difficult attachment behaviors, meaning that they

cannot give and receive affection in ways that parents expect and want. Some of the challenges

related to attachment styles include inconsistency toward adoptive family members characteristic

of disorganized attachments, indiscriminant friendliness that shows itself in having no preference

for adoptive parents, and fear and withdrawal reactions when parents attempt to show affection

(Albus & Dosier, 1999). These behaviors are typical of inhibited attachments. It takes

consistency, emotional maturity, and clear expectations, among many other qualities, for parents

to gain the trust of children with attachment issues and for the children to feel they are part of the

family.

The children may require special education services at school, counseling for past trauma,

or medical assistance for lasting physical conditions. This can take a great deal of time and

requires that parents have jobs and schedules that are flexible enough for them to keep the many

appointments that children could have. Not only must families be prepared to allow outside

services into their lives, but they learn to deal with sometimes intrusive comments and questions

about their children and themselves and to know that sometimes they will be blamed for the

behaviors of their children. Adequate preparation also includes helping parents understand that

love, commitment, and willingness to seek help are significant components of satisfaction with

adoption. Considerable effort may go into creating a sense of family.

In addition, we have seen the importance of good working relationships between adoptive

parents and adoption professionals. Professionals can offer counsel, emotional support, and

referrals to workshops, trainings, and psychological and medical services. They can educate
parents about policies and programs that will support their parenting. Some parents have

difficulties working with adoption professionals and with seeking help for their children, perhaps

out a sense of pride. We believe that when parents struggle with their children and don’t reach

out for help early on, then the problems can get much worse. The stability of the adoption and

satisfaction with adoption are at greater risk the longer parents delay seeking outside help.

We also recognize that sometimes the help is not adequate as Huston and Kramer (1998)

found and that some children may overwhelm the resources of adequate families, an outcome

that is well-documented in research (Reilly & Platz, 2003). Thus, we know from experience that

some adoptions don’t work out as planned, even when parents and professionals make best

efforts. Existing research confirms our observations, or visa versa.

While the challenges cannot be minimized, children with special needs in many ways are

no different from other children in that they can be appealing, fun, full of joy and a sense of

adventure, and wonderful to be around. They offer adoptive parents opportunities to share their

lives with children, the satisfaction of watching children change and grow, and the sense of

purpose that comes with parenting children. Also, many adults thrive on their identities as

parents.

Thus, the satisfactions of parenting children with special needs most often far outweighs

the challenges. We know this from our professional experiences, and research backs us up, in

that most adoptions of children with special needs are intact. Though the research is more than a

decade old, the highest rates of disruption at about 14% (Barth & Berry, 1988) are among older

children (who are special needs by definition). Among children with special needs adopted at

any age, the disruption rates are about a percentage point higher (Groze, 1986). This means that

at least 85% of special needs adoptions succeed. As services to adoptive families become more

widely available, these disruption rates have decreased (Barth & Berry, 1988).

In summary, our professional experience leads us to believe that 1) children with special

needs may present special challenges but also enormous satisfaction, 2) that personal, couple,
and family qualities are crucial to adoption satisfaction, 3) that parenting requires the help of

family and social networks, and 4) that adoptive families benefit when they engage with

supportive services and take advantage of the subsidies and supports that most families are

entitled to.

Parenting Children with Special Needs

Adoption professionals have long recognized the importance of preparing prospective

adoptive parents for the placement of children with special needs. For example, more than 25

years ago, Fox (1979) described a small, community-based program whose purpose was to

prepare foster and adoptive parents for children with special needs. Nelson (1985) showed that

agency preparation of prospective adoption parents is a significant factor in how well children

with special needs do in adoption placement. Although there has been little research on

preparation of adoptive parents, a considerable body of work documents qualities of adoptive

parents and their support networks associated with satisfaction with adoption and rates of

disruptions of adoption placements.

This research, too, has long history. More than 20 years ago, Cohen (1984) found that

parental unrealistic expectations about the children and their own capacities were associated with

both dissatisfaction with adoption and disruptions of the adoptions, findings that others have

replicated and elaborated (Barth & Berry, 1988;, 1995; Kagan & Reid, 1986). Reilly and Platz

(2003), for example, found that the more appropriate were parental expectations, the more

satisfaction parents had with their children and the more positive the impact was on marriage and

family life. About 10% of their respondents, however, stated that the impact of the adoption on

their marriages was mostly negative and close to50% said the impact had been positive. About

two-thirds said the overall impact on their family life had been positive. Reilly and

Platz (2003) reasoned that better preparation of adoptive parents for special needs children and

the more adequate the information that agencies provide about particular children placed in their

homes, the more positive adoptions will be for children, families, and marital relationships.
Other researchers have also pointed out the detrimental affects of parental rigidity in parenting

styles (Barth & Berry, 1988; Kagan & Reid, 1986; Groze, 1996; Reilly & Platz. 2003).

Qualities associated with satisfaction with parenting children with special needs include

effective parenting skills and the quality of the marital relationship (Rosenthal, Groze, &

Aguilar, 1991), adoptive families’ positive ratings of family functioning (Erich & Leung, 1988),

emotional closeness and flexibility and adaptation in family roles (Rosenthal et al, 1991),

parents’ participation in religious activities (Erich & Leung, 1998; Nelson, 1985), parental

capacities to manage their own emotional responses to children (Kagan & Reid, 1986), and

availability of persons in social networks to provide support to adoptive parents (Dunsts,

Trivette, & Deal, 1994, 1990; Kagan & Reid, 1986).

Post-placement services (Barth, Berry, Goodfield, & Feinberg, 1986; Groze, Young, &

Corcran-Rumppe, 1991) and parents’ willingness to engage with these services (Terling-Watt,

2001) are also factors in satisfaction with adoption and disruption rates. Parents sometimes have

problems finding adequate and appropriate services, which can affect adoption satisfaction

(Reilly & Platz, 2003).

In summary, the research literature in combination with our practice experiences shows

that adopting children with special needs presents challenges, that families who do well with

these adoptions have identifiable qualities, that supportive services can have positive effects on

adoption, and that preparation of parents for the adoption of children with special needs may

increase satisfaction with adoption, may increase the positive impact on marriage and family life,

and may help to ensure the stability of the placement.

Strengths-Based Perspectives

We approached this research with an orientation to strengths-based perspectives based

primarily upon research on resilience (Luthar, 2003), which directs practitioner attention to

positives as well as negatives within family systems (Gilgun, 1996; 1999a; 1999b; 2002a, 2002b,

2005a). Thus, we assumed that the most helpful parental self-assessments would focus on
positive qualities associated with satisfaction with adoption rather than with predictors of

negative outcomes.

Extrapolating from research on children’s regulation of emotions and cognitions

(Cicchetti & Rogosch, 2001; Shields & Cicchetti, 1998), the first author’s research on adults who

have experienced adversities (Gilgun, 1990, 1991; 1996, 1999a; Gilgun, Klein, & Pranis, 2000),

and our practice experience with adoptive parents and children eligible for adoption, we

hypothesized that parental capacities for self-regulation of their own emotions and cognitions

would be associated with adoptions that prevail.

More research has been devoted to factors accounting for disruptions and other negative

outcomes than to qualities associated with positive outcomes (Reilly & Platz, 2003). The present

research and self-survey and structured interview guide that resulted from this research are initial

attempts to identify the positive characteristics of adoptive parents and post-placement services

that are present in families who are satisfied with their experiences with adoption.

Method

A total of 56 adoptive parents and 24 service providers participated in focus groups and

individual interviews. The parents were caring for about 150 adoptive children with various

special needs, such as fetal alcohol syndrome, attachment issues, conduct disorders, learning

disabilities, and medical issues. About one-third of the European-American parents had adopted

African-American children. The sample was primarily white, married, and middle class.

Twenty-four parents -- 21 women and three men-- participated in five focus groups,

while 34 parents, 28 women and seven men, participated in individual interviews. Four of these

interviews were with both parents. The remainder of the interviews were with single parents or

the mothers in two-parent marriages. All but two of the individual interviews were in-person and

face-to-face. Two were by telephone. Ten adoption professionals participated in two focus

groups and 14 participated in individual interviews. All but two of the adoption professionals

were women. They had between one and 22 years experience as adoption professionals. The
focus groups were about two hours in duration, while the interviews were about 90 minutes long.

Five of the seven focus groups were co-led by members of the research team, and two were led

by one member of the research team.

We used a semi-structured interview guide. For the adoptive parents, the questions included

How long have you had adoptive/adopted children in your home? What kinds of issues did

these children have when first placed? What kinds of issues do they have now?

Did you initially think there was a good match between you and the children who were

placed in your home? Do you now think there was a good match between you and the children

who were placed in your home? Did you need extra help in terms of developing skills to deal

with your adoptive child(ren)? If yes, did you get the extra help? Did this help make a

difference? For the adoption professionals, the question included How would you characterize

children with special needs? How important is your relationship with adoptive parents and the

adoptive children to the success of the adoption? What does a successful adoption look like?

How do you know a successful adoption when you see one? What factors foster a successful

adoption?

The facilitators took extensive notes during the focus group and expanded upon them

later. Three of the seven groups were also tape recorded and the tapes transcribed verbatim. The

individual interviews were tape recorded and transcribed, although two of the interviews did not

result in usable tapes because of technical difficulties. Four additional interviews were not tape

recorded because the interviews took place in public places that had substantial background

noise. The interviewers also took extensive notes and expanded upon them later.

The fieldnotes and the transcripts were coded, first, to identify the major categories for

the APAC, and then re-coded to test the validity of the codes already identified, as well as to

modify and add to them researchers identified evidence that pointed to these changes. We

followed the procedures of open, axial, and selective coding as outlined in Strauss and Corbin

(1998). The assumptions of research on resilience, research on emotional and cognitive


regulation and dysregulation (Gilgun, 2005c), and our professional experience in adoption

guided our analysis.

Thus, our analytic approach can be considered deductive qualitative analysis (Gilgun,

2005b, 2004), which is a form of analysis that begins with a guiding conceptual framework that

provides researchers with sensitizing concepts, while at the same time directs researchers to seek

evidence that contradicts and thus expands emerging understandings. The results are findings

that are well-grounded in the research material and that are comprised of concepts whose

dimensions typically are well explicated.

Results

Interviews with adoptive parents and professionals not only confirmed much of our own

practice experience and findings of research cited in this present paper, but they also identified

other categories important to parenting children with special needs and fleshed out what was

already known. We identified six main categories that organized 28 subcategories for both the

RASS and the Guide. The six main categories are 1) parenting, 2) personal qualities, 3) family

and social networks, 4) values, expectations, and beliefs, 5) creating healthy environments, and

6) when you and your family need extra help. Figure 1 lists the categories and subcategories.

The first tool we developed was a prototype for what is now the Readiness to Adopt Self-

Survey (RASS). We wanted a tool for parents to complete as way for them to do some self-

reflection without fear of being judged. Adoptive parents often feel vulnerable when they are

seeking children. The Guided Conversation is an interview protocol that adoption professionals

conduct with parents after the parents complete the RASS. The tools would work together and

could be the bases of trainings and other ways of preparing adoptive parents. We believe that

the RASS and the Guide cover many important areas , and, thus, adoptive parents would be

prepared for the adoption of children with special needs if the two tools are used well.
The Self-Survey

At this point in our understanding of the RASS, we would like adoption agencies to make

the tool available to parents who are considering adoption. They can fill out the tool at their

leisure, reflect upon the implications of the qualities that adoptive parenting call for, and search

out resources to help them think through, and if they choose, to prepare to become adoptive

parents of children with special needs. The tool will be widely available on various websites on

the internet. Adoption agencies can also place the tool in their packet of information they give to

prospective adoptive parents.

We will encourage couples to discuss their responses with each other so that they can be

as clear as possible about each other’s motivations, strengths, and areas that require attention.

The survey will be completely anonymous. In order to test the reliability and validity of the tool,

the program will generate a table of the data from the responses to the RASS. No names will be

attached to these tables.

We will set up a program so that parents can save their responses and return to the tool at

a later time. When they complete the tool, the program will generate a brief report on their

strengths and areas that require more attention. Users will need a user name and password so

that they can go back to the form they were filling out. Users will get a report for each of the

categories of the RASS. The report will score the 4’s and 5’s as “you’re doing well here. The 3

mean you have to think about this. The 1’s and 2’s will mean that you have more work to do.

We will test the web version of RASS before we make it widely available.

There are many ways adoptive parents can further develop their capacities, such as on-

going parenting education and education about the various issues that children with special needs

bring with them; in-depth conversations with spouses and partners about their willingness and

capacities; discussions with extended family and friends who might provide supportive help to
parents; consultations with experienced adoptive parents, and sometimes psychotherapy to work

on family of origin and couple issues.

The Guided Interview

We quickly saw the potential for a structured interview that paralleled the self-survey.

Such an interview could lead to in-depth conversations about parenting issues and the need for

support and special services in many cases. The Guide is long, as is the RASS, and may require

several interviews to complete. Adoption agencies typically cover many of the categories in the

Guide. Therefore, we encourage adoption professionals to adapt the Guide to their practice.

Both tools normalize the need for services, support, and further education. This is

important because parents may view help-seeking as signs of their personal weakness and

inadequacy. Many of the personal qualities highlighted in both instruments are qualities that can

be developed through adoptive support groups and on-going training and education.

Both tools also may help adoption professionals to normalize the need for services and

the turmoil that can occur in adoptive families. We have seen some adoption professional

respond to such turmoil as the fault of the parents or of the children. The Guide and the RASS

assume that many children with special needs pose difficulties to adoptive parents, and they

point the way for constructive responses.

Some of the items are likely to provoke strong and sometimes difficult emotional

reactions in adoptive parents. Thus we recommend that the Guide be administered over two to

three interviews, that parents be informed that they don’t have to answer questions that they

don’t want to answer, and that not answering particular questions may simply mean that they are

not suited for particular kinds of children but that they may fit well with other children who are

in need of adoptive families. Adoption professionals can adapt the Guide to suit the policies and

practices of their agencies.

Rating Scale and Sample Items from the RASS

The rating scale for the RASS is as follows.


On a scale of 1 to 5, rate yourself on each of the following statements. The scale items are

1 = Doesn’t describe me at all


2 = Describes me a little
3 = Describes me somewhat
4 = Describes me quite well
5 = Describes me very well

The following are items from the first category of the RASS.

PARENTING

Identity as a Parent
___ I want to be a parent.
___ My partner wants to be a parent
___ I understand that parenting means giving up some things that are important to me.
___ I understand that parenting entails great rewards and some heartache.
___ When I adopt, I will have a strong sense that the children are my children.

Commitment
___ When I make a decision to adopt a child, I am making a commitment for life.
___ I understand that adopting children entails risks and that there are no guarantees about how
the children will turn out.
___ I can help my adopted children handle the sometimes harsh realities, such as their histories
of separation and loss.
___ I will remain committed to my children if new information about them comes to light, such
as their being more traumatized than I originally thought.

Willingness to Learn about Children’s Needs


___ I am willing to attend workshops and trainings on the issues that the children I adopt may
have, such as attachment issues, fetal alcohol syndrome and effects, and behavioral issues.
___ I will look beyond the children’s needs to see their resilience.
___ I assume that both positive and negative experiences have shaped how my children think,
feel, and behave.
Sample Items from the Guided Interview

1. The most important quality that adoptive parents have is their desire to be
Identity as a parents. What are your thoughts about wanting to parent adoptive children?
Parent 2. If you have a partner, what does your partner say about wanting to be a parent?
Are you satisfied that you both want to be parents? What kinds of issues have
you talked over with your partner?
3. Parenting entails giving up some things that are important to you. What do
you think you may have to give up? What do you think will make it
worthwhile if you do have to give up some things? How can you ensure that
you keep up with activities and interests that are important to you?
4. Parenting may bring you heartache as well as rewards. What kinds of
heartache might parenting bring? What rewards do you anticipate?
5. Parenting can bring up strong emotions and memories in you. Some are
pleasant and some are painful. What positive emotions and memories do you
think you’ll have when children come into your home? What painful emotions
and memories might come back? Do you have a plan for how you will handle
these emotions and memories? If yes, what is your plan?
6. Do you think that the children you will adopt will be your children? What are
your thoughts about how this will work for you?
7. Parents who have troubled relationships with their own parents can still parent
effectively. To do so, they must be able to talk about and think about their
own parents without becoming emotional and agitated, or without thinking it
doesn’t matter. What kind of relationship do you have with your own parents
now? When you were growing up?

The tool is so new that there are undoubtedly many more uses for them that we will discover as

we work with them over time.

Discussion

Given the numbers of children eligible for adoption and the incentives that the federal

government provides to public child welfare agencies, it is likely that the numbers of special

needs children who will be placed for adoption will continue to rise. As well-documented both

in the research literature and by adoption professionals and adoptive parents, realistic

expectations and in-depth preparation for parenting children with special needs is key to

adoptions that prevail and that are satisfying to parents and to the children. The RASS and the

Guide, based on the experiences of adoptive parents and adoption professionals, are designed to
promote self-reflection and action on the part of adoptive parents by focusing on documented

qualities associated with adoption satisfaction. The Guide may also educate adoption

professionals about important areas to consider in preparing adoptive parents for special needs

children, though this tool replicates some agency practice. Both tools are intended to help

prospective adoptive parents identify their strengths and areas that require further work and to

normalize the need for support, education, and services. .

Finally, we view the development of the RASS and the Guide as an example of evidence-

based practice in action. Both tools are based on research and theory (best research evidence)

qualitative interviews that we conducted with adoption professionals (clinical expertise), and

qualitative interviews that we conducted with adoptive parents (client preferences, values, and

experiences).

Figure 1: The Parallel Categories of the RASS and the Interview Guide

PARENTING
Identity as a Parent

Commitment

Willingness to Learn about Children’s Needs

Authoritative Parenting

Affirming Children’s Strengths, Cultural Heritage, and Identity

Facilitating Children’s Acceptance of their own Pasts

PERSONAL QUALITIES

Sense of Humor

Flexibility & Adaptability

Emotional Capacities

Resilience
FAMILY AND SOCIAL NETWORKS

Teamwork

Maintaining Contact with Biological Families and Other Persons


Important to the Children

Willingness to Deal with Reactions of Others to Your Adoptive


Parent Status

Impact of Adoption on Family Relationships

VALUES, EXPECTATIONS, AND BELIEFS


Altruism
Realistic Expectations About Yourself and the Children
Admiration of the Children
Spirituality
Sense of the Future
Some Adoptions Don’t Work as Planned

CREATING HEALTHY ENVIRONMENTS


Play, Hobbies, Sports, and Recreation
Physical Environment
Personal Resources

WHEN YOU AND YOUR FAMILY NEED EXTRA HELP


Willingness to Accept Help in Parenting
Preparation to Seek Help in Parenting
Relationships with Service Providers
References

Albus, Kathleeen E., & Mary Dozier (1999). Indiscriminate friendliness and terror of
strangers in infancy: Contributions from the study of infants in foster care. Infant Mental Health
Journal, 20(1), 30-41.
Barth, R. P., & Berry, M. (1988). Adoption and disruption. New York: Aldine de
Gruyter.
Barth, R. P., Berry, M., Goodfield, R., & Feinberg, B. (1986). Contributions to
disruptions and dissolutions of older child adoptions. Child Welfare, 65, 359-370.
Bower, J. W., & Laws, R. (2002). Support for families of children with special needs: A
policy analysis of adoption subsidy programs in the United States. St. Paul, MN: North
American Council on Adoptable Children. http://www.nacac.org
Cicchetti, D. & Gogosch, F. A. (2001). Diverse patterns of neuroendocrine activity in
maltreated children. Development and Psychopathology, 13, 677-693.
Cohen, J. (1984). Adoption: Current issues and trends. Toronto: Butterworth.
Fox, R. (1979). Preparing parents for children with special needs: A three-part approach.
Children and Youth Services Review, 1(4), 394-403.
Gilgun, Jane F. (2005a). Evidence-based practice, descriptive research, and the resilience-
schema-gender-brain (RSGB) assessment. British Journal of Social Work. 35 (6), 843-862.
Gilgun, Jane F. (2005b). Qualitative research and family psychology. Journal of Family
Psychology,19(1), 40-50.
Gilgun, Jane F. (2005c). The four cornerstones of evidence-based practice in social work.
Research on Social Work Practice, 15(1), 52-61.
Gilgun, J. F. (2004). Deductive qualitative analysis and family theory-building. In V.
Bengston, P. Dillworth Anderson, K. Allen, A. Acock, & D. Klein (Eds.). Sourcebook of Family
Theory and Methods .. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gilgun, J. F. (2002a). Completing the circle: American Indian Medicine Wheels and the
promotion of resilience in children and youth in care. Journal of Human Behavior and the Social
Environment, 6(2), 65-84.
Gilgun, J. F. (2002b). Social work and the assessment of the potential for violence. In T. N.
Tiong, & Dodds, I. (Eds.), Social work around the world II (pp. 58-74). Berne, Switzerland:
International Federation of Social Workers.
Gilgun, J. F. (2000, June). A Comprehensive Theory of Interpersonal Violence, paper
presented at the International Research Conference on the Victimization of Children and Youth:
An International Research Conference, Durham, NH, June 25-28.
Gilgun, J. F. (1999a). CASPARS: Clinical Assessment Instruments that measure strengths
and risks in children and families. In Martin C. Calder (Ed.), Working with young people who
sexually abuse: New pieces of the jigsaw puzzle. Dorset, England: Russell House.
Gilgun, J. F. (1999b). CASPARS: New tools for assessing client risks and strengths.
Families in Society, 80, 450-459. Tools available at http://ssw.che.umn.edu/faculty/jgilgun.htm
Gilgun, J. F. (1999c). Mapping resilience as process among adults maltreated in childhood.
In Hamilton I. McCubbin, Elizabeth A. Thompson, Anne I. Thompson, & Jo A. Futrell (Eds.), The
dynamics of resilient families. (pp. 41-70). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gilgun, J. F. (1996a). Human development and adversity in ecological perspective: Part
1: A conceptual framework. Families in Society, 77, 395-402.
Gilgun, J. F. (1996b). Human development and adversity in ecological perspective, Part
2: Three patterns. Families in Society, 77, 459-576.
Gilgun, J. F. (1992). Hypothesis generation in social work research. Journal of Social
Service Research, 15, 113-135.
Gilgun, J. F. (1991). Resilience and the intergenerational transmission of child sexual
abuse. In M. Q. Patton (Ed.), Family sexual abuse: Frontline research and evaluation (pp.93-
105). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Gilgun, J. F. (l990). Factors mediating the effects of childhood maltreatment. In M.
Hunter (Ed.), The sexually abused male: Prevalence, impact, and treatment (pp. 177-190).
Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Gilgun, J. F., & Laura S. Abrams (2003). Gendered adaptations, resilience, and the
perpetration of violence. Paper presented at the annual conference, Society for Social Work and
Research, Washington, D.C, January 17.
Gilgun, J. F. Klein, C., & Pranis, K. (2000). The significance of resources in models of risk,
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14, 627-646.
Gilgun, J. F., Keskinen, S., Marti, D. J. & Rice, K. (1999). Clinical applications of the
CASPARS instruments: Boys who act out sexually. Families in Society, 80, 629-641.
Green, R. (2003). Who will adopt the foster care children left behind? Urban Institute
Policy Briefs/Caring for Children. www.urban.org
Groze, V. (1996). Successful adoptive families: A longitudinal study of special needs
adoption. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Groze, V. (1995). A 1 and 2 year follow-up study of adoptive families and special needs
children. Children and Youth Services Review, 18, 57-82.
Groze, V. (1986). Special needs adoptions. Children and Youth Services Review, 8, 363-
373.
Houston, D. & Kramer, L. (1998). Supporting families as they adopt children with
special needs. Family Relations, 47 (4), 423-432.
Kagan, R. M. & Reid, W. J. (1986). Critical factors in the adoption of emotionally
disturbed youths. Child Welfare, 65(1), 63-73.
Leung, P., & Erich, S. (2002). Family functioning of adoptive children with special
needs: Implicaitons of familial supports and child characteristics. Children and Youth Services
Review, 24(11), 700-816.
Luthar, Sunyia (2003). Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the context of
childhood adversities. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nelson, K. (1985). A study of special needs adoptive families. New York: Child Welfare League
of America.
Patterson, J. E., Miller, R. B, Carnes, S., & Wilson, S. (2004). Evidence-based practice
for marriage and family therapists. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy, 30(2), 183-195.
Qureshi, H. (2004). Evidence in policy and practice: What kinds of research designs?
Journal of Social Work, 4(1), 7-23.

Reilly, T., & Paltz, L. (2003). Characteristics and challenges of families who adopt
children with special needs. Children and Youth Services Review, 25(10), 781-803.
Rosenthal, J., & Groze, V. (1992). Special needs adoption: A follow-up study. New
York: Praeger.
Sandmaier, Marian (1988). When love is not enough: How mental health professionals
can help special-needs children. Washington, D.C.: Child Welfare League of America.
Shields, A. & Cicchetti, D. (1998). Reactive aggression among maltreated children: The
contributions of attention and emotion dysregulation. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 27,
381-395.
Singh, N. N, & Oswald, D. P. (2004). Evidence-based practice. Part I: General
methodology. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 13(2), 129-142.
Smith, Susan Livingston & Jeanne !. Howard (1994). The impact of previous sexual
abuse on children’s adjustment in adoptive placement. Social Work, 39(5), 491-501.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Terling-Watt, T. (2001). Permanency in kinship care: An exploration of disruption rates
and factors associated with placement disruption. Children and Youth Services Review, 23 (2),
111-126.
Testa, M. F. (2004). When children cannot return home: Adoption and guardianship.
Future of Children, 14(1). www.futureofchildren.org

You might also like