| © 
        2000 Jordan Institute for Families
 | 
 Vol. 5, 
        No. 4October 
        2000
 Visitation and Concurrent 
        Planning Concurrent planning is the process of 
        working toward family reunification while, at the same time, developing 
        an alternative permanent plan. Developed to prevent foster care drift 
        in very young, chronically neglected children from multi-need families, 
        this procedure has been used successfully with all kinds of families. 
        
       Today, concurrent planning 
        is a standard part of how things are done in child welfare in North Carolina. 
        Our State formally adopted this practice in 1998, in part because the 
        federal Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 highlighted concurrent 
        planning as an appropriate practice to help assure timely permanence for 
        children (Katz, 1999). Concurrent planning also fits naturally with North 
        Carolina's goal of achieving a permanent home for all children within 
        one year of their entry into foster care.  
        The Role of Parent-Child 
        Visits Parental visitation plays an 
        important part in concurrent planning. Visitation patterns give everyone 
        involved in a family's casesocial workers, children, and the child's 
        parentsan idea of how the family is progressing. Seen this way, 
        visitation is a diagnostic tool. The frequency and relative success of 
        visits between parents and children can provide evidence either for early 
        reunification or for movement toward the alternative plan, be it adoption, 
        guardianship, or custody. Regular visits for those children headed towards 
        reunification can complement the parents' progress. Visits are a good 
        opportunity for parents to show their motivation for getting their children 
        back home and exhibiting new skills or behavior changes.  
       On the other hand, by scheduling 
        visits social workers can document that visits have not been denied and 
        provide occasions to document parental disinterest in the child, which 
        can lead to timely termination of parental rights and subsequent efforts 
        to achieve permanence.  
       Thus, in many cases, visitation 
        is a key determinant in the case outcome. For this reason, social workers 
        and their supervisors should use their influence to promote frequent parent-child 
        visits.  
        Influencing The Frequency 
        of Visits Social workers can do 
        three things to promote frequent parent-child visits. The first is to 
        try to schedule visits for times and locations that work for all the parties 
        involvedthe birth parents, foster parents, children, and, if applicable, 
        the social worker or person monitoring the visit.  
       When setting up the visitation 
        schedule for families, try to schedule as many visits as the parents and 
        other parties can reasonably attend. Because it places emphasis on making 
        a case decision within one year, concurrent planning generates more urgency 
        about scheduling frequent visits.  
       The second thing social workers 
        can do to promote visitation is to strategically recruit, select, and 
        train a pool of foster parents who can support the goals and tolerate 
        the uncertainties of concurrent planning. During training and when children 
        are placed in their homes, social workers can help support foster/adopt 
        families by having open, honest discussions with them about the risk they 
        are taking by agreeing to be "Plan B" (adoptive parents, guardians, 
        or custodians) when "Plan A" (reunification) has not been ruled 
        out.  
       Social workers should emphasize 
        that the level of "risk" for the relatives or foster parents 
        is not quantifiable. They should also make certain foster parents understand 
        how visits fit with concurrent planning and why they are important. Without 
        foster parent support, visits (and therefore concurrent planning itself) 
        may be less successful.  
       The third thing social workers 
        can do to promote visitation is to have frequent and quality contact with 
        the birth parents. In Factors in Length of Foster Care: Worker Activities 
        and Parent-Child Visitation, White, Albers, and Bitonti (1996) found 
        a link between how often social workers saw birth parents and how often 
        those parents saw their children. This same study also found a link between 
        the frequency of visits and the length of time children spent in foster 
        care: frequent visits seem to be tied to shorter stays in out-of-home 
        care.  
       Supervisors can support 
        social workers in their efforts to promote visitation by helping them 
        examine their personal experiences and biases toward visit planning. Supervisors 
        can also help social workers ensure "that visiting plans are individualized 
        and that the opportunities provided for parent-child contact exceed the 
        minimum required whenever indicated" (Hess, 1988). With their social 
        workers, supervisors should carefully explore any plans for using visits 
        "to reward parent progress or to test parental interest" (Hess, 
        1988).  
       In addition to monitoring the 
        activities of individual workers, supervisors should assess whether their 
        agency as a whole systematically promotes frequent visitation (White, 
        Albers, & Bitonti, 1996).  
       Although social workers' and 
        supervisors' roles in visitation cannot be underestimated, they are not 
        the only ones who affect the frequency of visits. Courts also exert considerable 
        influence in this area. For example, the courts in Santa Clara County, 
        California order that parents visit their children two to three times 
        a week in order to maintain bonds. This puts considerable pressure on 
        the social workers and foster parents to keep up with the visitation pace 
        (Wattenberg, 1997).  
       What to Watch for In order to practice concurrent 
        planning in a legal, honest, fair, and effective manner, certain mistakes 
        related to visitation must be avoided:  
       
        References Equating concurrent planning with adoption 
          and therefore minimizing reunification efforts.  
          This can lead caseworkers to schedule fewer visits.   Assuming assessment tools will infallibly 
          predict case outcomes. This may lead to minimizing reunification 
          efforts and decreasing visitations. Ultimately, the child's parents 
          will support or prove wrong the assessed placement outcome.  
        Investing in a particular outcome. 
          Allow the case to evolve from the family's decisions and actions.  
        Designing case plans that are not family-centered. 
          Put another way, the agency takes on responsibility for things the parents 
          should be doing. Parents have both rights and responsibilities. Concurrent 
          planning supports their active role in visitation, engaging in services, 
          and planning for their child's future.  Offering foster parents and relatives 
          an estimate of "legal risk." Let the adults take the risks, 
          not the children. Acknowledge that foster/adopt parents are taking on 
          the role of "Plan B" and still supporting parental visitation. 
          This is not easy. Encourage foster/adopt parents to become involved 
          in parent-child visits to promote more supportive relationships with 
          biological parents.   Interpreting 12 months as an absolute 
          limit on reunification, regardless of parental progress. "There 
          is a fine line between the judicious use of time limits to prevent foster 
          care drift, and a rote enforcement that ignores the full picture of 
          parental motivation, effort, incremental progress, and a foreseeable 
          reunification" (Katz, 1999).  Hess, P. (1988). 
        Case and context: Determinants of planned visit frequency in foster family 
        care. Child Welfare, 
        67(4), 311-325.  Hess, P. M. & 
        Proch, K. O. (1988). Family visiting in out-of-home care: A guide 
        to practice. Washington DC: Child Welfare League of America.  Katz, L. (1999). 
        Concurrent planning: Benefits and pitfalls. Child Welfare, 78(1), 
        71-87.  Wattenberg, E. (Ed.). 
        (1997). Redrawing the family circle: Concurrent planningPermanency 
        for young children in high risk situations. Minneapolis: Center 
        for Urban and Regional Affairs.  White, M., Albers, 
        E., & Bitonti, C. (1996). Factors in length of foster care: Worker 
        activities and parent-child visitation. Journal of Sociology and 
        Social Welfare, 23(2), 75-84.    
        
        
      
      
      
        
      
       
      © 2000 Jordan Institute for Families |