Family Connections Fall 2011

CARING FOR OUR KIDS pg. 14

the middle years

Studying Parents helps a UBC team Understand Families pg. 10

Tweens and Screens – what to dowhen a pastime turns addictive pg. 8

review: freedom to play vs avoiding risk pg. 19

Council for Families

The BC Council for Families Magazine Fall 2011

FamilyConnections

editor Marilee Peters

art director Tina Albrecht

contributors Charlotte Johnston, Yuanyuan Jiang, Natalie Miller, Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, Karen Cheung

subscriptionsBy membership with the BC Council for Families. www.bccf.ca

Family Connections is published four times per year by the BC Council for Families. Opinions expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Council, its members or funders.

#204 –2590 Granville Street Vancouver, bc v6h 3h1t 604 678 8884e [email protected]

Established in 1977, the BC Council for Families is a registered non-profit society. Registration #0488189-09-28

issn#1195-9428

officers of the societySylvia Tremblay · PresidentGale Stewart · Vice PresidentMarilee Peters · Acting Executive Director

board of directorsGail Brown · InteriorConnie Canam · Vancouver Coastal Paula Cayley · Vancouver CoastalBella Cenezero · FraserDeb Day · IslandKarl Eberle · NorthTim Fairgrieve · Vancouver CoastalKathy Kendall · InteriorLynn Locher · NorthCarolyn Mui · FraserJohn Thornburn · FraserKatie Tichauer · Vancouver CoastalSylvia Tremblay · Fraser Bev Wice · InteriorVictor Zhou · Vancouver Coastal

© 2011 BC Council for Families

Focus

10 Now why did he do that? Researchers at UBC’s Parenting Lab explore the connection between parent’s thoughts

about child behaviour and family functioning. Charlotte Johnston, Yuanyuan Jiang, and Natalie Miller

14 Caring for Kids Are we doing enough for children living out of the parental home? BC’s Representative

for Youth looks at the Extended Family Program, one year later. Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond

Departments

3 From the Editor’s Desk Let’s give the middle years the attention they deserve.

4 News & Notes Doing divorce right, supporting young families, BC shows it’s love for Nobody’s Perfect.

6 Toolbox Two recent books make the case for allowing kids to experience more risk! Plus,

exploring your family values this National Family Week.

8 Connections Profile: Benjamin Wong is helping Richmond families to connect and communicate.

18 Good to Know What’s a tween? Get the stats on this fascinating age group.

19 The Final Word A new leader at the Vanier Institute for the Family and a continued commitment to

Canadian families.

volume 15, issue 3 fall 2011

Printed on 100% recycled paper

Eco Audit

1 trees preserved for the future

4 lbs waterborne waste not

created

587 gallons wastewater flow

saved

65 lbs solid waste not

generated

128 lbs net greenhouse gases

prevented

979,200 BTUs energy not

consumed

2 Family Connections Fall 2011

FamilyConnections

From the Editor’s Desk

Marilee Peters, Editor

One of the odder theories of personality to have enjoyed a brief vogue among researchers – and subsequently, an enduring place in pop psychology – is birth order. According to those who subscribe to this theory, first born children are responsible, conscientious, dominating personalities. Contrast that with lastborns, who are creative, free-wheeling types.

Like astrology, this theory suffers from a lack of recognition of the incredible diversity and uniqueness of human experience (I’ve always wondered how astrologers can with a straight face tell us that, say, all Scorpios – one twelfth of the human population – are going to be “lucky in love” tomorrow). But like astrology, it’s compelling to read the descriptions of birth order personality traits and try to find those elements in your own character.

And right now I’m finding the parallels between middle child birth order and middle childhood itself oddly compelling. Middle children, according to birth order theorists, don’t get the amount of attention lavished on first or last born children, so they develop out of the limelight, becoming good negotiators, social peacemakers, and self-directed individualists. Now consider middle childhood – those “lost years” caught between the charming dependency of infancy and toddlerhood and the parentally-feared adolescent years. These are the years when children begin to develop autonomy, responsibility, a social circle outside of parental oversight.

These are the years when parents suddenly discover they no longer have to be on round the clock supervisory/caregiving/amusement duty, nor do they yet have to fashion themselves into the part-time therapist/full-time police officer role our culture prescribes for teenagers. The role for parents of tweens in western culture is caught, like tweens themselves, in this curiously undefined “middle” space. “Be there” and “take an interest” are the type of lackluster encouragements typically given to parents of children in the middle years.

And yet like middle children themselves, the middle years are unique, fascinating, and rewarding – for both kids and parents.

In this issue of Family Connections, we take a look at the middle years, and at some of the challenges families may encounter as children move into and through tweenhood. We feature a fascinating interview with Benjamin Wong, a clinical counsellor at Richmond Addiction Services, who’s finding success using the My Tween and Me parenting program (developed right here by the BC Council for Families!) as an early intervention strategy for families of kids at risk of developing internet gaming dependencies. There’s a report from the Parent Lab at UBC on how parents’ attributions for children’s behaviour affect the development of healthy family relationships. And my review of two intriguing new books out of the UK warning that we need to let tweens experience risk, or we run the chance of raising a generation unable to evaluate and manage risky situations, or to act independently.

Also in this issue – an overview from the office of the Representative for Children and Youth on recent changes to BC’s Child in the Home of a Relative program: is it a positive move forward for our province’s vulnerable kids?

There’s much here to get you thinking – but don’t stop there! Write and tell us your thoughts and reactions to what you read in these pages. We’ll print your letters sent to [email protected] in our upcoming winter issue.

Talk to you then!

Fall 2011 Family Connections 3

a resource manual. The focus is to equip practitioners with the information and tools to work with parents to achieve a balanced and healthy separation for families.

New Faces, Diverse PerspectivesFrom student intern to Board of Directors in one year is a big leap, but recently appointed director Katie Tichauer is up to the challenge. After spending the summer of 2010 assisting in the Council offices, helping to organize an annual provincial conference for workers in BC’s young parent programs, the UBC psychology graduate felt it was time to deepen her commitment to supporting families in BC. In June 2011 she joined the BC Council for Families’ Board of Directors, becoming the youngest person to sit on the Council’s board. “Families are an integral part of society, and it’s important that struggling families receive the support they need. When I first saw the opportunity to be involved with the Council, it interested me because I really wanted to do my part towards helping families prosper in my community,” says Katie. Interested in bringing your perspective on family issues to the Council? Contact us at [email protected] for information about the 2012 call for nominations.

Healthy Families, Brighter FuturesIf you’re like us, you probably enjoy:• Sharing your challenges and successes with your peers and colleagues• Learning about new research and practices

Breaking Up Without Breaking DownAbout 40% of marriages in Canada today end in divorce. It’s not a happy statistic, but it’s a reality of modern family life, and one that many family practitioners are struggling with, trying to find ways to help divorcing parents who want to ensure their children aren’t negatively affected by the upheaval of divorce. Frequently, these parents are also looking for support as they embark on a new adventure: co-parenting. Co-parenting with a former partner entails setting aside relationship issues in order to focus on what’s best for the children. That can be a tall order for many estranged parents, and it’s why the BC Council for Families is developing a new series of tools to help practitioners to work more effectively with separated and divorced families. As program coordinator David Sheftel points out, “Even though a couple is splitting up, they are both going to be parents to their children forever. They need to know how to be good parents in this situation. This is why it is important for professionals who are working with families in all different capacities to be more aware and understanding of the issues around parenting when couples are breaking up. It’s not the break-up of a couple which harms the children most, it’s how it’s handled and how parents help kids get through the split that determines the children’s resulting emotional health.“ With funding from Justice Canada, the Council will offer in-person workshops, a series of online video resources, tip sheets to utilize when working with parents, and

in a friendly, supportive atmosphere• Long walks on the beach. Good news! All but the last (and how did that one slip in anyway?) can be found this October in Vancouver at the Healthy Families, Brighter Futures conference hosted by the BC Council for Families. The conference, at SFU, offers family service workers an opportunity to join their colleagues from around the province in a collaborative, interactive, and participatory learning environment. “ It’s going to be an exciting and full day of learning. It will be a great opportunity to network, and gain valuable information about working with families. The variety of speakers will provide family professionals with practical skills that they can take away with them to use in their work with families,“ says conference organizer Pilar Onatra. The conference will feature two insightful, expert keynote speakers – Dr. Paul Kershaw and John Hoffman. Dr. Kershaw, is one of Canada’s leading thinkers about caregiving and family policy and has received two national prizes from the Canadian Political Science Association for his research. John Hoffman is a National Magazine Award-winning journalist and Canada’s leading writer on fatherhood. With a full day of presentations, break-out sessions, workshops, and discussion groups, Healthy Families, Brighter Futures will help family professionals learn the skills and strategies that will assist them in strengthening and supporting families and children. Join us on October 21st as we create opportunities to teach, learn together, and share skills, wisdom, perspectives, and experiences.

Newly appointed Board Member Katie Tichauer


News & Notes

Showing Our LoveThe stage is set for an epic showdown: in one corner, a 30-year old parenting program that has helped thousands of Canadian parents gain the skills and confidence to parent effectively. In the other corner, dwindling government and funder resources – resulting in fewer programs for families available in communities across the country. Who will win? All too often recently, when the opponents are social programs versus the need to pare back government budgets, the real losers are vulnerable families and children. That’s why this spring Ruby Banga, BC’s provincial coordinator of the Nobody’s Perfect program, decided to show the human faces behind the renowned Canadian parenting program. “We wanted to find a way that people could show their support for the program

in a fun way that also has a lot of impact. An online photo petition was the perfect answer,” explains Ruby. Launched on Facebook in June with the help of Communications Intern Karen Cheung, the I ❤ Nobody’s Perfect photo petition has been gathering support all summer long. To participate, all you need is a camera, a computer, a happy smile, and an “I ❤ Nobody’s Perfect” sign (make your own or download one at www.bccf.ca). The next step for the campaign? “We’ll be creating a video slideshow from all the photos we receive, to share with funders, governments, and decision-makers. It’s a great, visually compelling way to let people know how much support this program has,” says Ruby. Have you joined the I ❤ Nobody’s Perfect photo petition yet? If not, get to http://www.facebook.com/photopetition and show your ❤!


r e a d e r r e v i e w s : Balancing Risk and Fostering Growth

Reclaiming Childhood: Freedom and play in an age of fear Helene Guldberg. Routledge: Oxford, UK. 2009.No Fear: Growing up in a risk averse society Tim Gill. Caloust Gulbenkian Foundation: London, UK. 2009.“To be honest, adults can be very stupid at times. They ban everything, for health and safety reasons …they might as well lock all kids in empty rooms to keep them safe. Kids should be allowed to experiment and try things. Otherwise when they grow up they’ll make very stupid mistakes from not getting enough experience at childhood.” (No Fear: Growing up in a risk-averse society, p. 19) These are the words of British pre-teen, commenting in a story on the BBC News about his school’s decision to ban the game of tag from school playgrounds. Four lines from an exasperated pre-teen, which come darn close to summing up the central thesis of two recent books examining western society’s ever-increasing fear of risk and its effect on our children. Put even more simply, both Tim Gill’s “No Fear: Growing up in a risk averse society” and Helene Guldberg’s “Reclaiming Childhood: Freedom and play in an age of fear” argue that efforts to shield children from all risk do them a grave dis-service. Rather than focusing on risk alone, policy-makers, schools, service providers and parents need to begin looking at ways to balance risk with children’s developmental need (and children’s own desire for) freedom, autonomy, and responsibility for their own safety. Gill puts it best, in the conclusion to

his short (94 pages) but absorbing look at the topic : “children [need to] grow up as engaged, self-confident, responsible, resilient citizens: people who both feel they have some control over their destinies and are alive to the consequences of their actions. This will only happen if their childhoods include some simple ingredients: frequent, unregulated, self-directed contact with people and places beyond the immediate spheres of family and school, and the chance to learn from their mistakes” (Gill, 84). It’s a compelling argument that is beginning to gain strength amongst academics and experts in childhood development, but is only slowly changing policies on the ground – in schools, playgrounds, streets and homes. As both authors admit, change will be difficult to achieve in the face of media hyperbole on the dangers of child abduction, pedophilia, and violence – all of which produces a environment in which adults feel unsafe in their communities, and feel that their children are even more at risk. More statistically probable, yet less hyped dangers also reduce children’s freedom in today’s urban centres – the dangers of cities and streets designed for cars rather than pedestrians. Paradoxically, Guldberg argues, we’re worrying more than ever about children at a time when children’s lives are safer, healthier, wealthier, better fed, and better educated than they’ve ever been. She dismisses much of parents’ and service providers’ fears about children as simply the product of nostalgia (“I never texted as a child, therefore it must be bad for kids”),

ignorance, or misunderstanding. “The crisis of childhood is caused less by the realities of the modern world than by an overly negative perception of the modern world which recasts opportunities as new problems, ” she concludes. (Guldberg, 179) Whether you believe parks are dangerous and Facebook is filled with potential child abductors, or whether you think that children should be equipped to deal with potential dangers and allowed to run (age-appropriate) risks – these books will give you much to ponder. Brief, compellingly written introductions to the topic of risk and resilience, each has much to offer to parents and to service providers.

what have you been reading lately? If you’d like to

share your impressions, contact [email protected] to find

out about submitting a reader review.


Toolbox

fa m i ly act i v i t y : What does my Family Value?

key points Values are strong influences when we interact with, guide, or discipline our child(ren).

materials: • Paper and pen

directions1 Display Activity: What does my Family Value? or distribute list and ask group to write:a Ten things that they believe are values in their family (from the list and additional items) b What are some ways they convey these values to their child(ren) in daily life?2 Ask parents to share their ideas with the group.3 Ask parents to discuss any insights they had while thinking about what they value or how they convey these values.

My family values…• Academic success• Formal education• Classical music• Neighbours• Privacy• Wealth and status• Fame• Outdoor activities• Athletic ability• Art and theater• Emotional expression• Family togetherness• Frugality• Natural and organic foods• Spirituality• Family traditions• Elders as teachers• Military involvement• Socialist politics• Dogs as pets• Environmental protection

Canada’s National Family Week will be celebrated from October 3 - 9 this year. It’s a great time to stop and think about the meaning of family – in our lives, our communities, and our whole society. And this year the Canadian Association of Family Resource Programs (the lead organizer of National Family Week) has asked us all to think even more deeply: the theme of this year’s week for families is “Putting Your Family Values Into Action”. Family Values? For many of us, the term now calls to mind either a cartoon tv series, or American political rhetoric. Yet every family has values, which consciously or unconsciously, parents and adult family members transmit to children. Taking a thoughtful look at what you value and how your parenting conveys (or doesn’t convey!) those values to your children is an important first step in putting your family values into action. Fortunately, the Council’s My Tween and Me parenting program has an activity designed to help parents take that step. This is a great activity to share with parents in a group setting, but can work equally well to inspire individual reflection or a family discussion. For more information about National Family Week, and events and celebrations taking place across Canada and in a community near you, see the website of the Canadian Association of Family Resource Programs at www.frp.ca.

do you have an activity that you often use with families? To contribute an

activity, contact us at [email protected]


benjamin wong: Before taking the My Tween and Me training, I spent a year and a half working with families affected by technology. One of the things that really caught my attention in My Tween and Me is the emphasis on how society is changing. A major motivator of change is technology, and that’s something that I believe needs to be talked about. Computers have invaded our households without too many people critically evaluating how technology will impact the way we teach and raise the next generation. It brings a lot of positives, I don’t doubt that – I use technology myself; at the same time, what else are we bringing to the development of all young people growing up in this digital age? My Tween And Me helps parents explore how new media is affecting family and peer relationships. The program has given me a good scope of what to consider, what to look for. In individual family therapy work, I now draw on My Tween and Me.

fc: What should parents look for in identifying screen/technology addiction?

bw: The three C’s of addiction: control, compulsion, and consequences. We don’t consider every gamer an addict, there’s got

Profile: Benjamin WongYouth and Family Counsellor, Richmond Addiction Services

Screen and technology addictions among preteen children are a very new phenomenon, and they’re one more indication of just how rapidly family life, and childhood itself, is changing. New challenges, such as helping families to prevent or manage the risks of technology dependency, call for innovative approaches, and that’s just what Richmond-based clinical counsellor Benjamin Wong has come up with. He’s adapted the My Tween and Me parenting program for use as an early intervention tool for families concerned about their children’s use of screen technologies. Wong has been counselling youth with screen addictions for over three years, and for the past two he’s been using My Tween and Me as part of a family-centred approach to therapy. Family Connections had the opportunity to sit down with Benjamin recently and discuss screen and technology addictions in young people, the role of parents, and how My Tween and Me fits in as a preventive program in today’s swiftly changing world.

family connections: How does a parenting education program like My Tween and Me fit into your approach to counselling kids with technology addictions?

to be a reversal of control; the behaviour controls the person. We need to establish compulsivity in their behaviour; as the problem worsens, they’re unable to say, “Okay, this is enough.” We look at the negative consequences too: how relationships are hurt, personal hygiene, sleep deprivation – a fairly health-based approach. What’s interesting is time alone is not predictive of addiction. It’s an important aspect to highlight to parents. Parents, as soon as they see a lot of time spent on Farmville, for example, they freak out.

fc: How common are these addictions in pre-teens?

bw: The latest literature indicates roughly 8–10% of youth aged 8–19. The overwhelming majority are boys, pushing 85%. I’ve had a couple girls that exhibit addictive behaviours, but more so with emailing, texting, and social networking.

fc: How should parents manage their kids’ technology usage?

bw: Having healthy, ongoing dialogue with kids on how to incorporate technology in life is very important. The majority of problem

Connections


gamers that I see, their families either don’t talk about it, or they talk about it only in negative ways. I think it’s helpful to delay kids’ exposure to technology for as long as possible. Not because it’s “bad”, but because especially during the first five or six years when their minds are developing so quickly, to diversify their experiences as opposed to confining them to a screen. When kids begin to engage with technology, they need a responsible adults to guide them. We all know there’s so much age inappropriate content – it’s such a disaster for a computer to reside in the bedroom, or for kids to start off using a laptop rather than a desktop. They can hide in the bathroom and watch whatever and parents won’t know.

fc: What are the questions parents from My Tween And Me ask you about? Particularly around technology?

bw: They ask: “how do I build a relationship with my child in this ever-changing society”? They want to learn what’s inside children’s heads. So much out there fights for kids’ attention – parents aren’t winning the battle. Parents usually ask: “How do I re-establish a

relationship”? “What are things I need to pay attention to in communicating with my child”? “How do I communicate values”? “How do I enforce house rules without undermining their need for independence”? What’s interesting is that the discussions on technology really boil down to the parental-child relationship – the quality of it. Which is the central premise of the My Tween And Me program.

fc: What are parents finding beneficial about the program?

bw: It normalizes their feelings and some of the concerns that they have. I think parents need some recognition that their concerns are valid and that there are resources to turn to. They also find it more important after the program to look back into their own upbringings. Times have changed, different approaches are required, but the program helps them to realize that the values that they want to pass on to the next generation are still valid. I always find the end of group feedback interesting. They say, “I wish I knew this ten years ago”, “I wish I had the opportunity to do this before even having kids”. It’s good food for thought. Society pushes parents to focus

on career, money, success. There’s a lack of emphasis from society on giving parents the support, the space, the time, and the energy to invest in their kids. My Tween and Me needs to be something that’s in every corner of our communities so parents feel supported.

One of the things that really caught my attention in My

Tween and Me is the emphasis on how society is changing.

A major motivator of change is technology, and that’s

something that I believe needs to be talked about.

Karen Cheung

Karen interned at the BC Council for Families during

the summer of 2011. Now a fourth year student

in English Literature at the University of British

Columbia, Karen enjoyed the opportunity to use her

communications skills to promote the importance

of family life education and to advocate on behalf of

families and family serving professionals.


NOWWHY DID HE DOTHAT?


Focus

A team of researchers at UBC is investigating how parents’ explanations for child behaviour affect parenting and child outcomes Charlotte Johnston, Yuanyuan Jiang, and Natalie Miller

For several years, families have been coming to the Parenting Lab in the Department of Psychology at the University of British Columbia to

help us with research aimed at understanding parents’ thoughts about the causes of child behaviour. We became interested in this question based on experiences with families in our clinic. We had found that two families could present with the same child problem (e.g., “he doesn’t stay in bed at bedtime”), but offer very different explanations for why the behaviour was occurring (“he wants to stay up to bug me” or “he has trouble settling down to sleep”). And these different types of causal explanations (attributions as psychologists call them) seemed related

to different types of family interactions. So, along with researchers at other institutions, we set out to see if we could understand this phenomenon more scientifically. Search One of our first questions was whether or not most parents even engage in thinking about the reasons for their child’s behaviour. Maybe parents only make attributions for their child’s behaviour when a researcher asks them “why did he do that?” Luckily, we found that when parents watched videotapes of their own child and we asked them the open-ended question “what are you thinking?” a meaningful proportion of parents’ thoughts are causal attributions (“I was thinking he doesn’t want to do his homework because it’s boring”). Knowing this, we proceeded with studying parents’ attributions in more detail.

To assess what parents are thinking about the reasons for child behavior, we often ask parents to read written descriptions of the child behaviours. This has the scientific advantage of making sure that all parents are responding to the same child behaviour, so that differences in attributions are not related to different child problems across parents. Although this is great for scientific control, we were concerned that reading about child problems is not the same as actually responding to them in real life. However, in a number of studies we have used more realistic methods to elicit parent attributions, and we find similar results. Whether parents imagine that the child in a written vignette is their own child, recall their own child’s behaviour, watch videotapes

NOWWHY DID HE DOTHAT?


However, it also is the case that when mothers see their child’s misbehaviour as due to causes that are controllable by the child, and that are pervasive and enduring over time, then the child’s level of problem behaviour is likely to increase over a 1 year period. This finding suggests that the mother’s attributions have a role in maintaining the child’s problems, while the reverse is not true. That is, the child’s initial level of problems does not predict whether mothers become more negative in their attributions over time. With colleagues from the Oregon Research Institute, we also have studied

parent attributions in families of adolescents with depression. We found that when parents make negative attributions for their adolescent daughter’s problem behaviour (e.g., “she is selfish”), the adolescent is more likely to be depressed. Again suggesting the important role of parent attributions in parent-youth interactions, we also found that negative parent attributions predict more critical and hostile parenting behaviour with the adolescent, even with the effects of the adolescent’s behaviour controlled.

Attribution and ADHDOur interest in parents’ attributions has been integrated with an ongoing focus on Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children. This disorder, characterized by inattention, impulsivity, and hyperactivity, occurs in about 5% of school-aged children and appears to be predominantly caused by genes and/or biological factors. Thus, it is not surprising that we find that parents of children with ADHD see behaviours that are symptomatic of the disorder (e.g., forgetfulness,

of their own child, or offer attributions in a running commentary as they watch their child perform tasks, we find very similar results. So, knowing that parents do make causal attributions for their children’s behaviour and that we can effectively study these in a laboratory context, let’s move on to tell you a little about our findings.

Which Comes First? The Behaviour or the Attribution?One of the important questions we have is the extent to which parents’ attributions can lead to problems for the parent and/or the child, or whether these attributions reflect existing child problems and have little influence on parenting or child behaviour. That is, do negative attributions about the child’s behaviour (e.g., “he’s a brat”) make things worse, or are they just the result of having a child who misbehaves? It is critical that we make clear at this point that none of our research hinges on looking for someone to “blame” for family or child problems. There is unlikely to ever be a single cause that accounts for family or child problems. We firmly believe that parents’ attributions are based both on their own experiences and beliefs (e.g., their cultural background, how they were raised) and in the reality of their child’s behaviour (e.g., children do intentionally misbehave at times). Our questions have focused on understanding the role of parent attributions, amongst the many other factors that maintain or exacerbate problems within parent-child interactions. In several studies, we found that mothers of children with more oppositional or defiant behaviour are more likely to make negative attributions for their child’s misbehaviour (e.g., “he lazy,” “he’s doing it to bug me”), suggesting that experiences with their child have led them to these conclusions.

restlessness) as caused by factors within the child (internal), but which are uncontrollable by the child, long lasting and happen in many situations. However, our findings also suggest that these parents often see the child’s oppositional or defiant behaviours in the same way (as uncontrollable, but enduring and pervasive). Given the unpredictable and variable nature of the behaviour of children with ADHD, we believe that determining the reason for particular child behaviours is one of the greatest challenges that parents of children with ADHD face. On a moment to moment basis they must decide if their child’s

behaviour is primarily due to his disorder or whether it is something more intentional. Is the child not responding to the parent’s request to turn off a video game because he is inattentive and “spaced out” or is he purposefully ignoring the parent? These are important questions, because the different reasons for the child’s behaviour would call for different parenting responses.

Understanding Attribution to Improve ParentingAs our understanding of parent attributions grows, we have begun to ask questions about how to use this knowledge to improve education and/or treatment for families. For example, we studied how parents’ attributions may change when children with ADHD are treated with medication and found that both parents and children see the child as having greater control over behaviour when medicated. We also looked at parents’ attributions for their own behaviour and found that parents who see themselves as capable and in control are more likely to benefit from

“He wants to stay up to bug me”


Focus

education about parenting strategies. Much more work on how we can best use our growing understanding of parent attributions to further family functioning is needed. For example, we suspect that it may be important to develop tools that will help parents remain as objective as possible in their views of what is causing child behaviour, and to be willing to change their attributions as the child changes either with age or with treatment. In closing, we feel fortunate to have the opportunity to study parents’ attributions and are excited to continue research that will guide efforts to assist parents and children in improving their interactions. As with most productive research programs, our studies have relied on many sources of support. Most important are all the families who devoted their time and energy to filling out our questionnaires, answering our sometimes puzzling questions, and letting us watch them as they interact with their children in the Parenting Lab. They are the core of what we do and why we exist. We also thank our funding sources, most notably the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

for further information about our research or

to find out about participating in our studies, please

contact the Parenting Lab at [email protected] or

6040-822-9037.

selected referencesJohnston, C., & Ohan, J. L. (2005). The importance of parental attributions in families of children with Attention-Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 8, 167-182.

Mah, J. W. T., & Johnston, C. (2008). Parental social cognitions: Considerations in the

acceptability and engagement in behavioral parent training. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 11, 218-236.

Johnston, C., & Ohan, J. L. (2005). The importance of parental attributions in families of children with Attention-Deficit and Disruptive Behavior Disorders. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 8, 167-182.

Bugental, D. B. & Johnston, C. (2000). Parental and child cognition in the context of the family. Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 51, 315-344.

Connect with readers. Connect with families.

Advertising in Family Connections is a great way to showcase your events or services. Family Connections helps you get your message out to family service professionals all across BC.

special member ratesTo book your advertisement, contact:Tina Albrecht, [email protected]

Our next ad deadline is October 28, 2011.

HealthyFamilies!Family news you need to know.• New research• Policies and programs• Reports and statistics• Trainings and professional

development• Events and updates from the BC

Council for Families

Free! Delivered to your desktop every Monday morning.

Subscribe online: www.bccf.ca

Charlotte Johnston,

Yuanyuan Jiang, & Natalie Miller

Charlotte received her PhD in Clinical Child

Psychology from Florida State University. She is

currently a professor in the Clinical Psychology

Program in the Department of Psychology at UBC

and a registered clinical psychologist. Over the past

25 years, she has studied families of children with

disruptive behaviour disorders, including Attention-

Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), has published

over 100 scientific articles and chapters, and regularly

presents workshops and lectures on parent-child

interactions and child behaviour problems.

Natalie Miller and Yuanyuan Jiang are PhD

students in the Clinical Psychology program at the

University of British Columbia. They study families

of children with disruptive behaviour disorders and

recently spent time working with such families at a

behavioural treatment program in Miami, Florida.



Focus

When Parents can’t, extended family often steps in. Are we doing

enough to support them, and to protect children? An Examination

of BC’s Extended Family Program – One Year Later.

Caring for Kids Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, BC Representative for Children and Youth

M ost children in British Columbia are raised by their parents, who provide them with the care,

support and planning needed for their healthy development and well-being. For some children though, a stable and supportive parental home is not a reality; their homes have fallen apart and they have no parent able or willing to care for them. Some parents – and sometimes children and youth – seek out other caregivers from within their families to provide a safe and stable home. In recent years BC’s Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) has focussed on reducing the number of children in government care and increasing the number of children placed with extended family. One aim of this focus is to provide the least disruptive living arrangement when a parent is temporarily unable to care for a

child. This approach is believed to support better outcomes for children, fewer changes in placements, with a goal to reunite the child with the parent in the future. This practice has been available in BC for decades through programs such as the Child in the Home of a Relative (CIHR) program. The CIHR program made it possible to transfer care of a child to another person, and for that person to seek financial assistance to support that care. Historically, there was no assessment of the relative caring for the child, no screening of the placement to ensure the child’s safety and no long term planning or monitoring of the child. CIHR was not income tested, nor was it a child welfare program. Parental involvement was minimal. However in December 2007, MCFD and the Ministry of Employment and Income Assistance instituted a screening

policy as an additional eligibility criterion for the CIHR program. Since being appointed in November 2006 as the Representative for Children and Youth, the issue of safety and well-being of the children and youth in the CIHR program has been a matter of concern and review for me. Due to these concerns, I did an audit of the CIHR screening process to determine whether it was rigorous enough in protecting the safety of children and youth. I released a report on this audit in June 2010, titled No Shortcuts to Safety. Prior to the release of this report government announced it would phase out the CIHR program at the end of March 2010 and introduced the new Extended Family Program (EFP). No new applications would be accepted in CIHR, but existing clients would retain their benefits.


The goal of the program is to reunite children with their parents wherever possible. The social worker and the family develop a plan for the child that addresses their needs, and the family agrees to remain in contact with the social worker at least every six months to evaluate the plan and services. Agreements can be extended as long as the assessment of the child’s needs supports a longer time. If it is determined that the child cannot return to the care of their parents, then long term planning including consideration of other guardianship arrangements is required. With the implementation of any new program, it is important that staff understand what the policies are, how the new program operates, and be properly trained and provided with appropriate introductory information. This is especially important for programs that affect benefits and services for vulnerable families. It is clear from my audit that when the new CIHR screening policy was implemented without adequate communication and training to front-line workers, staff were left to figure out the new policy and create their own procedures, steps that ultimately led to inconsistencies in screening. Even during the initial implementation of the EFP, social

workers were required to assess the child’s needs to determine if the EFP was the best option, however assessment tools were not provided to staff. While the EFP potentially offers some additional financial benefits and social supports to families, it appears that budget pressures at MCFD will limit the program’s availability. Further, appropriate alternatives are not available to those families ineligible for the new program. For example, relatives with guardianship of children will not be eligible, no matter what their circumstances or that of the child who is placed . During the first year of implementation, my Office’s advocacy program received many calls from the public with questions about the new program, families having difficulties navigating between CIHR and EFP, and grandparents/relatives not meeting eligibility for EFP because of their legal guardianship of the child. When the CIHR program was still accepting new clients, families were encouraged by MCFD staff to pursue CIHR because it was the least intrusive way of providing financial assistance; however, upon implementation of the EFP, families had to apply to a new program. Some families were not clear what the EFP was, while others who were previously on CIHR, wanted to

be re-instated, but could not because the program was no longer available. Some families were encouraged to pursue legal guardianship of the child in their care and found out they were ineligible for EFP once they became the legal guardian. For example, a grandmother had legal guardianship of her grandson through the Family Relations Act and was receiving CIHR. The youth decided he wanted to live with a sibling on a Youth Agreement, but the placement did not work out and the youth moved back in with his grandmother. However, CIHR was no longer available and the grandmother was not eligible for EFP. One of my advocates worked with the family and MCFD to help access other support services to assist the placement. Since the implementation of the Extended Family Program more than a year ago, program use appears to be low. From April 2010 through March 2011, an average of 44 new cases were opened each month compared to the former CIHR program of 136 new cases on average each month. The implementation of new program reform and improvement should not result in significantly fewer children being served. You may also ask, what about the approximately 3,298 children who continue to

The Extended Family Program became effective on April 1, 2010, and provides supports to children, families and caregivers to meet the needs of the child living with a relative or close family friend when parents are temporarily unable to provide care. The child’s needs are assessed by ministry or delegated Aboriginal Agency staff to determine if the EFP best addresses the child’s and family’s situation.


Focus

The implementation of new program reform and improvement should not result in significantly fewer children being served.

receive benefits through the CIHR program? When the EFP was announced, there was no commitment from the ministry to look at the children in the CIHR program. Those children continue to receive benefits, with no assessment to determine the child’s needs, little support beyond financial assistance, and no provision for long term planning. When I released my report one year ago I expressed concerns about this large group of BC children being at risk of potential harm while living in homes of relatives, and expressed an urgent need for government to re-screen the adults caring for them under CIHR.

My audit identified numerous problems with screening, including some cases where relatives were approved as caregivers despite an adult in the home having a troubling criminal record or previous child protection concerns. Placements sometimes took place without any one from government actually seeing the child or assessing the home’s suitability for an at-risk child. I am pleased to say that we have had active discussions with MCFD about the significant challenge where caregivers either were not screened at all or were screened inadequately because of a faulty screening method. We don’t have a resolution of the issue, but we are in discussions about it. I’m hoping that there will be movement and implementation of the recommendations in No Shortcuts to Safety because it remains a large safety concern for these children. The issues continue to be of concern to the public. Certainly I urge and support caregivers and others to welcome that screening. I think

almost all of the organizations I’m working with are keen to see if there are child safety issues, they get resolved. With regards to EFP, a plan is required for every child receiving support. This is a written document that details the services and supports necessary to meet the needs of the child and ensure stability of the placement. The child’s plan addresses goals and time frames aimed at child returning home, the responsibility of the parent(s), the care provider and the worker, and the services provided to the parent to help strengthen their capacity to meet the needs of their child.

I will continue to monitor the caseloads, services and budget for the EFP and report regularly on findings. As well, I will continue to work with government to ensure that services offered to caregivers are supported and to provide advocacy services when possible to children, youth and caregivers dealing with these programs. I want to briefly comment on a recent change to the Child, Family and Community Service Act (CFCS Act) with regards to placing children temporarily with family members. The amendment allows the ministry to apply for guardianship changes which means family members do not have to bear the cost of a family law application where parents are unable to care for their children. As well there will now be proper screening of caregivers who become guardians. About 2,000 children will be better protected because of this change.

updateSince the above article was submitted, the Ministry of Children and Family Development has announced that it will be expanding the screening of families participating in the Child in the Home of a Relative program to include those families accepted prior to December 2007. The screening will begin with families caring for the youngest and most vulnerable children, and is expected to be completed by March 2012. “We are extremely pleased that the Ministry is taking this step which will help to ensure the safety and well-being of all children and youth in the CIHR program,” said Representative for Children and Youth Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond. “I am hopeful that grandparents and relatives will be pleased to participate in this initiative to further ensure children’s safety. I know that relatives caring for their loved ones do so out of a genuine desire to make sure these children are raised with love, security and stability.”

Find out more about the work of the BC Representative for Children and Youth online at www.rcybc.ca.


Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond

Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond is BC’s Representative

for Children and Youth. She holds a doctorate of

law from Harvard Law School, a master’s degree in

international law from Cambridge University, and a

law degree from Osgoode Hall. A member of the

Muskeg Lake Cree Nation, she is active in her First

Nations community. She actively supports healthy

families and seeks greater respect and recognition

for the unique situation of children in society,

particularly vulnerable children.

sourcesDeborah Solk, Building a Family Program for Middle Childhood: A Literature and Program Review, 2006

Middle Childhood Inside and Out: The Psychological and Social World of Children 9–12, 2007

Our Children’s Voices: The Middle Years Development Instrument, 2010

The Road Ahead: A guidebook for Parents of Young Teens, Centre for Addictions Research of BC.

Louise Hanvey, Issues Affecting the Well-Being of Canadian Children in the Middle Years – 6 to 12: A Discussion Paper

My Tween and Me: Program Leader Guide, 2008.

Numbering our Tweens• In 2000, there were 2.7 million children aged

6–12; 9% of the total population of the country

• 2/3 of these children live in 1 of Canada’s 25 largest metropolitan areas

• 5% of children in the middle years are Aboriginal, in 2001, representing 1/3 of all Aboriginal people

• in 2001, 5.5% of tweens came from outside Canada (Ibid)

• 8% of the kids in this age range live in families speaking languages other than English or French

Tech generation• Less than 20% of children are meeting the

Canadian Paediatric Society guideline of 2 hours or less of ‘screen time’ daily

• As part of after school activities: • 41% use instant messaging • 38% play online computer games • 33% play video/computer games • 21% spend time emailing

Working Families• 80% of women with children 6 to 15 were

in the labour force 1999 • Canadian Institute of Child Health estimates

the number of children reported to be home without supervision range from 7–60%

Substance Use• 19% of 12–14 year olds have tried smoking

cigarettes• 20% have tried marijuana• 33% of 13 year-olds have tried alcohol

What do Parents Need to Know?• Tweens who engage in excessive use

of technology after school consistently report being less happy and competent than their peers

• Parents matter, even in middle childhood. Children entering adolescence still function best if they experience high parent connectedness

• Relationships with peers and adults in the school and community are important in fostering children’s social and emotional competence

Good to Know

“What happens during middle childhood is critical for health, well-being, adjustment, and success in late childhood, adolescence, and early adulthood.”– Our Children’s Voices: The Middle Years Development Instrument, 2010


What’s the best part about stepping in as leader of one of this country’s most well-respected, indeed venerable family policy organizations? Is it being sought after by the media to comment on the latest family issue to hit the news? Is it being consulted by governments coast to coast on new policy approaches? Is it the connections to new research and academia? According to Nora Spinks, the new CEO at the Vanier Institute of the Family, yes, that’s all great, but here’s the part that really rocks: “At the Vanier, we’re so fortunate. Thanks to the foresight of the institute’s founders, we have an endowment fund that allows us to keep the lights on while enabling us to remain a truly independent voice for Canadian families.” In today’s parched non-profit landscape, that kind of independence is increasingly a rarity. It puts the Vanier Institute in an enviable position, but also a position of some responsibility, and that’s something that Spinks takes quite seriously. She was unsparing recently in her comments on the Statistics Canada decision, announced earlier this summer, to stop collecting and publishing annual data on marriage and divorce rates: “This decision will impact researchers, policy makers, service providers, teachers, lawyers, communities… Just when funders are increasingly demanding an evidence base, a key part of that evidence is disappearing. It’ll become much harder to put together a funding proposal for resources or services for divorcing families now, and that’s going to mean a real loss for those families, who require support.”

In a sector overwhelmingly dominated by research, resources and services directed at families with young children, the Vanier’s independence also allows it to focus on areas of family life that get decidedly less airtime. A case in point: the current Caregiving and Work survey being undertaken by the Vanier in partnership with the Universities of Guelph and Alberta. “85% of family caregiving for seniors is done by people who are also in the paid workforce,” Spinks points out. “You just can’t separate work and family any longer, and we hope this study will increase awareness of the complexity of combining caregiving responsibilities and work.” The survey, which asks employers both about their policies and about real experiences supporting employees who are balancing caregiving and work, is open until December, and preliminary results will be published in the upcoming months. To participate, visit the Vanier Institute online at www.vifamily.ca. And keep your eyes (and ears) open – it’s almost certain you’ll be hearing more from the Vanier Institute in the months and years ahead. Three cheers for an independent voice for Canadian families!

a voice for canadian families: Vanier Institute for the family


The Final Word

Printed on 100% recycled paper

YES, I want to help support and strengthen families in BC!

PRESIDENT’S CIRCLE DONORS Family Philanthropist ($25,000 or more) Sustainer ($250 or more) Family Champion ($5,000 or more) Supporter ($100 or more) Family Visionary ($2,500 or more) Contributor ($25 or more) Family Benefactor ($1,000 or more) Family Advocate ($500 or more) Other $

Amount $

VISA MasterCard Cheque or money order enclosed

Name on Credit Card

Card number

Expiry Date

Signature

First Name Last Name

Address

City Province Postal Code

Telephone Fax

Email

I wish to be publicly acknowledged for my gift YES NO

Yes, please send me information on leaving an estate gift to the Council

All donations to the BC Council for Families are tax-deductible. Federal Registered Charity #11921 7180 RP 0001

Return to: BC Council for Families 204 - 2590 Granville St, Vancouver BC V6H 3H1

At the BC Council for Families we truly love families. We’ve invested more than 30 years developing programs and resources that meet the needs of families – always focusing on prevention and proactive activities.

To continue, we need your help. Now you can invest in the future of BC’s families, by becoming a founding member of the BC Council for Families’ Presidents Circle.

Documents

Family Connections Fall 2011