nos.nl
High Rate of Children Returning to Out-of-Home Care in Netherlands
A Leiden University study found that 40% of children placed in out-of-home care in 2018 returned home by 2023, with 25% experiencing a second placement; staff shortages, parental trauma, and frequent child moves contribute to this high rate of re-placement, impacting children's mental health.
- How do the frequent moves and emergency placements experienced by these children affect their mental and emotional health?
- The study, following 456 children placed in 2018 until 2023, reveals that insufficient support after reunification and difficult family situations contribute to the high rate of repeat placements. Lack of resources, parental trauma, and difficulties in parenting impede successful reintegration.
- What are the most significant factors contributing to the high rate of children returning to out-of-home care after initial reunification?
- Four out of ten children placed in out-of-home care return home, according to a Leiden University study commissioned by the Dutch cabinet. A concerning 25% of children initially returning home face a second placement. This highlights the instability many children experience.
- What systemic changes are needed to improve the effectiveness of support systems for families and children involved in out-of-home care, considering both the short-term and long-term impact of such measures?
- The frequent moves experienced by nearly half of the children (with one child moved 13 times) and the high number of emergency placements (over 25%) underscore the need for improved support systems. These situations, often involving police intervention with little time for goodbyes, are highly traumatic and negatively impact children's well-being.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The headline and introduction immediately emphasize the high rate of children returning home after placement, potentially framing the issue negatively. The article focuses extensively on the negative consequences of the process, like multiple placements and traumatic separations, potentially amplifying the sense of crisis and overlooking potential successes or mitigating factors. The inclusion of quotes from the professor further emphasizes the negative aspects.
Language Bias
The article employs charged language such as "zorgelijk" (worrying), "traumatisch" (traumatic), and "schadelijk" (harmful), reinforcing the negative tone. The repeated emphasis on negative consequences contributes to an overall pessimistic perspective. More neutral alternatives could include "concerning," "difficult," and "adverse."
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the negative aspects of the child removal and return process, potentially omitting success stories or positive outcomes that could provide a more balanced perspective. The article also doesn't delve into the reasons why children initially ended up in out-of-home placement, which could offer crucial context.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified view of the situation, focusing on the challenges and difficulties without adequately exploring the complex interplay of factors involved in successful reunification. The implication is that more resources are the sole solution, neglecting other potential strategies.
Sustainable Development Goals
Children experiencing out-of-home placement often face increased vulnerability and instability, potentially impacting their future socioeconomic prospects. The high rate of children returning home and subsequent re-placements suggests systemic challenges hindering their stability and long-term well-being, potentially perpetuating cycles of poverty.