父母在围产期儿童保护过程中的经历:以社会生态学方法为基础的系统综述和专题综述

IF 2.4 2区 社会学 Q1 FAMILY STUDIES Children and Youth Services Review Pub Date : 2024-10-06 DOI:10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.107960
{"title":"父母在围产期儿童保护过程中的经历:以社会生态学方法为基础的系统综述和专题综述","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.107960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Nationally and internationally, researchers and practitioners are increasingly expressing concerns regarding the number of babies removed by child protection systems soon after birth and how child protection processes in the perinatal period (conception to one year following birth) impact families.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This systematic review synthesises qualitative studies to gain an understanding of the experiences and needs of pregnant women, mothers, and fathers involved in perinatal child protection processes that occur in health, welfare, and legal systems.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Multi-disciplinary electronic databases (13) were searched for relevant peer-reviewed journal articles written in English and published since 2000. Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. Analysis adopted a socio-ecological approach and thematic synthesis. An expert advisory group comprised of lived experience advisors, service providers, and academics contributed to development of the thematic framework.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Although the reviewed studies were conducted between 2005 and 2023 with diverse participants from six countries, they highlight parents’ similar experiences of perinatal child protection processes. Parents’ experiences were synthesised according to spheres of the socio-ecological model:</div><div>(i) At the <em>individual</em> level, parents described their love, hope, confusion, fear, agency, and anguish.</div><div>(ii) Within <em>relationships</em> parents recounted broken parent-baby bonds, limited personal and professional support, and the implications of trauma and trust for parent-professional relationships.</div><div>(iii) When engaging with <em>organisations</em> parents reported pervasive surveillance and harmful processes, inadequate communication and support, and power imbalances.</div><div>(iv) At <em>policy and societal levels</em> parents’ experiences pointed to dominant Western norms and values, increased poverty and homelessness, compromised rights, and prejudicial perinatal policies.</div><div>Also synthesised are parents’, professionals’, and researchers’ recommendations for improving perinatal child protection processes and supporting families.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Over the last 20 years, qualitative studies from around the globe have consistently reported the adverse biopsychosocial impacts of removing babies from their families. Addressing poverty and trauma, redressing power imbalances, and mitigating the enduring impact of perinatal child protection processes is critical for parents’ to be able to keep or be reunified with their babies. Shifts at institutional, policy, and societal levels are needed to: prioritise prevention and early intervention; enable relational practice and cross-sector collaboration; and move beyond traditional Western notions of family. Centring parents’ voices in efforts to improve child protection processes before and after birth will help inform the delivery of early and appropriate support to meet parents’ identified needs and promote family wellbeing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48428,"journal":{"name":"Children and Youth Services Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parents’ experiences of perinatal child protection processes: A systematic review and thematic synthesis informed by a socio-ecological approach\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.107960\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Nationally and internationally, researchers and practitioners are increasingly expressing concerns regarding the number of babies removed by child protection systems soon after birth and how child protection processes in the perinatal period (conception to one year following birth) impact families.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This systematic review synthesises qualitative studies to gain an understanding of the experiences and needs of pregnant women, mothers, and fathers involved in perinatal child protection processes that occur in health, welfare, and legal systems.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Multi-disciplinary electronic databases (13) were searched for relevant peer-reviewed journal articles written in English and published since 2000. Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. Analysis adopted a socio-ecological approach and thematic synthesis. An expert advisory group comprised of lived experience advisors, service providers, and academics contributed to development of the thematic framework.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Although the reviewed studies were conducted between 2005 and 2023 with diverse participants from six countries, they highlight parents’ similar experiences of perinatal child protection processes. Parents’ experiences were synthesised according to spheres of the socio-ecological model:</div><div>(i) At the <em>individual</em> level, parents described their love, hope, confusion, fear, agency, and anguish.</div><div>(ii) Within <em>relationships</em> parents recounted broken parent-baby bonds, limited personal and professional support, and the implications of trauma and trust for parent-professional relationships.</div><div>(iii) When engaging with <em>organisations</em> parents reported pervasive surveillance and harmful processes, inadequate communication and support, and power imbalances.</div><div>(iv) At <em>policy and societal levels</em> parents’ experiences pointed to dominant Western norms and values, increased poverty and homelessness, compromised rights, and prejudicial perinatal policies.</div><div>Also synthesised are parents’, professionals’, and researchers’ recommendations for improving perinatal child protection processes and supporting families.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Over the last 20 years, qualitative studies from around the globe have consistently reported the adverse biopsychosocial impacts of removing babies from their families. Addressing poverty and trauma, redressing power imbalances, and mitigating the enduring impact of perinatal child protection processes is critical for parents’ to be able to keep or be reunified with their babies. Shifts at institutional, policy, and societal levels are needed to: prioritise prevention and early intervention; enable relational practice and cross-sector collaboration; and move beyond traditional Western notions of family. Centring parents’ voices in efforts to improve child protection processes before and after birth will help inform the delivery of early and appropriate support to meet parents’ identified needs and promote family wellbeing.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48428,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Children and Youth Services Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Children and Youth Services Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740924005322\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"FAMILY STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Children and Youth Services Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740924005322","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景在国内外,研究人员和从业人员对婴儿出生后不久即被儿童保护系统带走的数量以及围产期(受孕至出生后一年)的儿童保护过程对家庭的影响表示越来越多的关注。目的本系统性综述综合了定性研究,以了解孕妇、母亲和父亲在围产期儿童保护过程中的经历和需求,这些过程发生在卫生、福利和法律系统中。方法在多学科电子数据库(13 个)中搜索了自 2000 年以来发表的相关英文同行评审期刊文章。有 24 篇文章符合纳入标准。分析采用了社会生态学方法和专题综合法。由生活经验顾问、服务提供者和学者组成的专家顾问小组为主题框架的制定做出了贡献。结果尽管所审查的研究是在 2005 年至 2023 年期间进行的,参与者来自六个国家,但这些研究突出了父母在围产期儿童保护过程中的相似经历。根据社会生态模型的各个领域,对父母的经历进行了归纳:(i) 在个人层面,父母描述了他们的爱、希望、困惑、恐惧、能动性和痛苦。(ii) 在人际关系中,父母讲述了父母与婴儿之间破碎的纽带、有限的个人和专业支持,以及创伤和信任对父母与专业人员关系的影响。(iii) 在与机构接触时,父母报告了普遍存在的监视和有害程序、沟通和支持不足以及权力失衡。(iv)在政策和社会层面上,父母的经历指出了西方主流规范和价值观、贫困和无家可归现象的增加、权利受损以及偏见性围产期政策。结论在过去的 20 年中,来自全球各地的定性研究一致报告了将婴儿从其家庭中带走所带来的不利的生物心理社会影响。解决贫困和创伤问题、纠正权力失衡、减轻围产期儿童保护过程的持久影响,对于父母能否保住婴儿或与婴儿团聚至关重要。需要在机构、政策和社会层面做出转变,以便:优先考虑预防和早期干预;促进关系实践和跨部门合作;超越传统的西方家庭观念。在改善出生前后儿童保护程序的工作中,以父母的声音为中心,将有助于提供早期和适当的支持,以满足父母已确定的需求并促进家庭幸福。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Parents’ experiences of perinatal child protection processes: A systematic review and thematic synthesis informed by a socio-ecological approach

Background

Nationally and internationally, researchers and practitioners are increasingly expressing concerns regarding the number of babies removed by child protection systems soon after birth and how child protection processes in the perinatal period (conception to one year following birth) impact families.

Aim

This systematic review synthesises qualitative studies to gain an understanding of the experiences and needs of pregnant women, mothers, and fathers involved in perinatal child protection processes that occur in health, welfare, and legal systems.

Methods

Multi-disciplinary electronic databases (13) were searched for relevant peer-reviewed journal articles written in English and published since 2000. Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria. Analysis adopted a socio-ecological approach and thematic synthesis. An expert advisory group comprised of lived experience advisors, service providers, and academics contributed to development of the thematic framework.

Results

Although the reviewed studies were conducted between 2005 and 2023 with diverse participants from six countries, they highlight parents’ similar experiences of perinatal child protection processes. Parents’ experiences were synthesised according to spheres of the socio-ecological model:
(i) At the individual level, parents described their love, hope, confusion, fear, agency, and anguish.
(ii) Within relationships parents recounted broken parent-baby bonds, limited personal and professional support, and the implications of trauma and trust for parent-professional relationships.
(iii) When engaging with organisations parents reported pervasive surveillance and harmful processes, inadequate communication and support, and power imbalances.
(iv) At policy and societal levels parents’ experiences pointed to dominant Western norms and values, increased poverty and homelessness, compromised rights, and prejudicial perinatal policies.
Also synthesised are parents’, professionals’, and researchers’ recommendations for improving perinatal child protection processes and supporting families.

Conclusions

Over the last 20 years, qualitative studies from around the globe have consistently reported the adverse biopsychosocial impacts of removing babies from their families. Addressing poverty and trauma, redressing power imbalances, and mitigating the enduring impact of perinatal child protection processes is critical for parents’ to be able to keep or be reunified with their babies. Shifts at institutional, policy, and societal levels are needed to: prioritise prevention and early intervention; enable relational practice and cross-sector collaboration; and move beyond traditional Western notions of family. Centring parents’ voices in efforts to improve child protection processes before and after birth will help inform the delivery of early and appropriate support to meet parents’ identified needs and promote family wellbeing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.10%
发文量
303
期刊介绍: Children and Youth Services Review is an interdisciplinary forum for critical scholarship regarding service programs for children and youth. The journal will publish full-length articles, current research and policy notes, and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
Maternal childhood polyvictimization and neglect of their children: Evidence among Salar Muslim women Doing with or doing to? A realist case study of factors affecting the implementation of guidance on child sexual exploitation in Wales A randomized trial of trauma-informed training content: Effects on preschool teachers’ trauma-informed attitudes, stress, and coping Foster care adoption recruitment methods: A review of the literature amid calls for reform in the United States Early childhood education contingencies for sustaining learning during school closures: Lessons from preschool remote education home visits in Indonesia during the COVID-19 pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1