Reunification for children in out-of-home care- Part 2: Reunification success rates and the consequences of reunification failure December 2017

  • Around 1 in 5 Queensland children have experienced one or more failed reunifications
  • Around 1 in 4 reunified children return to out-of-home care within 12 months (US data)

  • Around 1 in 3 reunified childrenreturn to out-of-home care within 5 years (UK data)

  • One in three reunified children experience 2 or more failed returns (UK data)
/ The safe reunification of children in out-of-home care with their families is the policy priorityin every Australian state. However knowledge and research in this area is very limited. This summary outlines research on reunification success rates and the consequences of reunification failure.

How manyreunifications break down?

A growing number of UK and US studies have examined rates of re-entry into out-of-home care after reunification. These studies have consistently found that failed reunification attempts are common.[1]Studies with longer follow-up periods report higher failure rates.[2]
Estimated rates of re-entry to out-of-home care from US studies vary between 19 and 24 percent.[3]US studies have found that re-entry often occurs within the first 12 months of children being returned to their families.[4]A large UK study used data from the UK Department for Education to tracka cohort of 10,270 care-leavers over a 5-year follow-up period. The study found that 30% of reunified children had been returned to out-of-home care within five years.
There is some evidence that many children will experience multiple failed attempts at reunification and oscillate between home and out-of-home care for many years. One UK study found that one third of reunified children experienced two or more failed returns.[5] A Queensland study of 2509 children and young people in foster care[6] found that around 1 in 5 reported that they had experienced one or more failed reunification attempts.

  • There is a significant risk of failure when attempting to reunify a child from out-of-home care with their birth family.
  • Alcohol, drug misuse, and failed prior reunifications are the risk factors associated with a high likelihood of future harm.
  • Risk of harm is substantially higher for children reunified with substance misusing parents.
  • Where these risk factors are present, great caution needs to be exercised when considering reunification.
  • Repeated attempts at reunification are to be avoided as children who have experienced multiple failed reunifications have significantly worse outcomes than children who remain in care.
  • Failed reunifications can often have serious and negative consequences including exposing children to additional experiences of abuse and neglect.
  • The financial cost of a failed reunification is extremely high.
  • A policy and practice focus on improving reunification outcomes has the potential to be very cost effective.
/ What is the impact of failed reunifications?
A growing body of research suggests that wellbeing and stability outcomes for reunified children are often worse than for those who remain in out-of-home care. This is particularly so for those children who have experienced neglect or emotional abuse.[7][8][9]Children who have experienced multiple failed reunification attempts have significantly worse outcomes than those who remain in care.[10][11]
Failed reunification attempts:
  • Contribute to placement instability which is associated with a range of negative outcomesincluding an increased risk of social and mental health problems as well as academic problems at school.[12][13][14] Children who return to care are often not able to live with their prior carer, which further compounds instability.[15]
  • Can expose children to additional experiences of abuse. A UK study[16]of reunification outcomes of a sample of children who had come into care because ofabuse or neglect, found that around half suffered further abuse after returning home.
  • The rate of abuse and neglect was higher for children reunified with substance misusing parents (78%) versus those whose parents were not misusing alcohol or drugs (28%).
  • Can result in children experiencing extended periods of poor standards of care.[17]
  • Involve particularly high costs.[18] One UK study estimated the annual cost of a failed reunification to be around £60,000 (AU$110,000) per child. These costs included social work costs, decision making and placement costs and additional legal costs.[19]
Key reunification issue
This paper has highlighted the frequency of reunification breakdown and the negative impact of this.The next challenge is to identify policies and practices that can support successful and safe reunifications, where this is in the best interests of the child.

References

[1]Fernandez, E. & Lee, J. (2013). Accomplishing family reunification for children in care: An Australian study. Child and Youth Services Review, 35, 1374-1384.

[2] Holmes, L. (2014). Supporting children and families returning home from care: Counting the costs.

[3]Biehal, N. (2006). Reuniting looked after children with their families: A review of the research. Retrieved from

[4]Wulczyn (2004). Family reunification. The Future of Children, 14(1), 95-113.

[5]Farmer, E. R. G., Sturgess, W., O'Neill, T., & Wijedasa, D. (2011). Achieving successful returns from care: What makes reunification work? London: British Association of Adoption & Fostering.

[6] Commissioner for Children and Young People and Child Guardian (2012). 2011 views of children and young people in foster care survey. Retrieved from

[7]Murphy, E. & Fairtlough, A. (2015). The successful reunification of abused and neglected looked after children with their families: A case-file audit. British Journal of Social Work, 45, 2261-2280.

[8]Wulczyn (2004). Family reunification. The Future of Children, 14(1), 95-113.

[9]Wade, J., Biehal, N., Farrelly, N., & Sinclair, I. (2010). Maltreated children in the looked after system: A comparison of outcomes for those who go home and those who do not. Retrieved from

[10]Farmer, E. R. G., Sturgess, W., O'Neill, T., & Wijedasa, D. (2011). Achieving successful returns from care: What makes reunification work? London: British Association of Adoption & Fostering.

[11]Wade, J., Biehal, N., Farrelly, N., & Sinclair, I. (2010). Maltreated children in the looked after system: A comparison of outcomes for those who go home and those who do not. Retrieved from

[12]Blakey, J. M., Leathers, S. J., Lawler, M., Washington, T., Natschke, C., Strand, T. & Walton, Q. (2012). A review of how states are addressing placement stability. Child and Youth Services Review, 34, 369-378.

[13]Rubin, D. M., O'Reilly, A. L., Luan, X., & Localio, A. R. (2007). The impact of placement stability on behavioral well-being for children in foster care. Pediatrics, 119(2), 336-344.

[14]Thoburn, J., Robinson, J., & Anderson, B. (2012). Returning children home from public care (Research briefing 42). London: Social Care Institute for Excellence.

[15] Hannon, C., Wood, C. & Bazalgette, L. (2010). In loco parentis. London: Demos. Retrieved from

[16]Farmer, E. et al. (2008). The reunification of looked after children with their parents: Patterns, interventions and outcomes. Retrieved from

[17]Farmer, E. R. G., Sturgess, W., O'Neill, T., & Wijedasa, D. (2011). Achieving successful returns from care: What makes reunification work? London: British Association of Adoption & Fostering.

[18]Davis, C. & Ward, H. (2012). Safeguarding children across services: messages from research. Retrieved from

[19]Holmes, L. (2014). Supporting children and families returning home from care: Counting the costs.