Rockhill, A., Green, B.L., & Furrer, C. (2007). Is the Adoption and Safe Families Act influencing child welfare outcomes for families with substance abuse issues? Child Maltreatment, 12(1), 7-19.
The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), enacted in 1997 in the United States, was passed largely as a response to growing concerns about the "foster care drift", or the fact that many children under child protection were experiencing multiple and unstable foster care placements over extended periods of time. However, up until now, little is known about whether ASFA was meeting its intended goal of decreasing the amount of time to establish a permanent placement for children, or whether it was having potential negative consequences, such as accelerating adoption for families having difficulty obtaining needed services. This study examined differences in child welfare outcomes (length of stay in foster care, time to permanency, type of permanent placement) for parents struggling with substance abuse issues before and after the implementation of ASFA in the state of Oregon. Results show that length of stay in foster care was shorter post-ASFA (37 days shorter); however, time to permanent placement (M = 327 days) was approximately the same in both the pre- and post-ASFA time frames. Also, a larger proportion of children were moved towards adoption post-ASFA (10.5%), compared to pre-ASFA (5.9%), and fewer children remained in foster care during the post-ASFA period (34.3%), compared to before ASFA (39.8%). It was found that post-ASFA cases were 1.19 times more likely to reach permanency than pre-ASFA cases. Also, children post-ASFA were 2.2 times more likely to be freed for adoption, as opposed to remaining in foster care, compared to children pre-ASFA. A model taking into account age of the child and type of abuse allegation accounted for 30% of the variation in permanency decisions (freed for adoption vs. remained in foster care): infants were more likely to be adopted than older youth and children from families with neglect allegations were less likely to be freed for adoption than children from families with other types of abuse allegations. Finally, a second model contrasting the probability of reunification vs. the likelihood of any other permanency decision showed that there was no significant reduction in the likelihood that children would be reunified following the implementation of ASFA.
The sample consists of mothers only (921 pre-ASFA and 990 post-ASFA) for whom substance abuse was an issue identified by the child welfare system and who had at least one contact within the Oregon state's alcohol and drug treatment system. Results therefore cannot be generalized to women who may have had a substance abuse problem but who did not receive treatment. Also, the modest impact of ASFA observed in this study might be related to the fact that Oregon is apparently widely known for its progressive child welfare system, were ASFA-like regulations have been adopted and put in place prior to the passage of this federal legislation. Oregon is also considered "service rich" relative to some other states, especially in terms of publicly funded substance abuse treatment services. Data was collected from Oregon's child welfare administrative database and from the Oregon Client Process Management System (statewide system that monitors alcohol and drug treatment services). Effects of prevs. post-ASFA status on length of stay in foster care was analyzed using hierarchical multiple regressions. Also, logistic regressions were used to predict the likelihood of adoption and reunification.