ABSTRACT

Family interventions have been introduced in several European countries as social inclusion measures for disadvantaged families. Compared with adult social work, in social work for families, social workers aim to utilise a whole-family approach; they follow up all family members, acknowledge multiple target areas and coordinate the services for the families. This cluster-randomised study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03102775) with a mixed methods approach analyses children’s involvement in family interventions and compares child-related effects of governmental (the HOLF model) and local family intervention practices in Norway. The data are based on a cluster-randomised study involving 29 Labour and Welfare offices and baseline and follow-up questionnaires for parents (N = 862). We conducted in-depth interviews with family coordinators to help us understand how children are involved and how their involvement may contribute to any improvements. While there were no effects of using the HOLF model compared with local family intervention practices, results indicate that the family intervention seems to contribute to increasing children’s involvement with welfare services and improving their access to welfare support. The interviews demonstrate the potential of a genuine whole-family approach, where children are directly involved in the family intervention practices.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03102775

摘要

一些欧洲国家引入了家庭干预措施，作为弱势家庭的社会包容措施。与成人社会工作相比，在家庭社会工作中，社会工作者旨在利用整个家庭的方式；他们跟进所有家庭成员，确认多个目标区域并协调为家庭提供的服务。这项采用混合方法的整群随机研究（ClinicalTrials.gov：NCT03102775）分析了儿童参与家庭干预的情况，并比较了挪威政府（HOLF 模型）和当地家庭干预实践对儿童的影响。数据基于一项涉及 29 个劳动和福利办公室的整群随机研究，以及针对父母的基线和后续调查问卷 ( N = 862）。我们与家庭协调员进行了深入访谈，以帮助我们了解儿童如何参与以及他们的参与如何有助于改善。虽然与当地的家庭干预做法相比，使用 HOLF 模型没有效果，但结果表明，家庭干预似乎有助于增加儿童对福利服务的参与，并改善他们获得福利支持的机会。访谈展示了真正的全家庭方法的潜力，在这种方法中，儿童直接参与家庭干预实践。

试用注册： ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符：NCT03102775