JOURNAL
ISSUE 5
2002/2003
Suncana
Kusturin
Antun Ilijaš
Krešo Makvic
Welfare Centre
Zagreb
Office Pešcenica
Work with the
Family – the Alternative to Institutionalisation
Introduction
Family, with
all its content and its roles, can be described as a basic
human union in which life begins and ends. Children who we
often consider as our biggest treasure and gift have the right
to the care and protection not only of the adult family members
but of the whole community as well. From the time of the child’s
birth, the family is the one who has direct, intensive, positive
and negative influences on the child’s development as
a person (especially in childhood and adolescence). Introducing
a child to culture, values and norms of society begins in
one’s family. So therefore, for the harmonious and complete
development of a child’s personality and self-respect,
its learning of all necessary life skills and appropriate
behaviour, the natural, happy, loving and understanding family
environment is vital.
The general declaration
of human rights from the United Nations (1948) says: Family
is the natural and basic unit of society and has the right
to protection of the society and the state.” The UN’s
World top level meeting, held in 1990, was dedicated to children
and its conclusion was: “It is necessary to do all that
is in our power to prevent separation of children from their
families”
Many international
conventions and declarations as well as laws of many countries
are aimed at helping families fulfil their fundamental role
with quality and in a substantial way. Although protection
and help are the priorities of the existing legislation, some
laws give possibilities of using repressive measures in times
when family or their members are failing in meeting their
obligations or if their behaviour breaks society’s norms,
customs or laws.
Croatian laws
dealing with these problems are Family laws, Welfare laws,
Criminal laws and Juvenile’s courts laws. In these laws
we can see the difference between regulations that refer to
juveniles and those which refer to parents or adults.
In this paper
we will primarily focus on the legislation institutions and
handling of children whose asocial and unacceptable behaviour
causes society’s reaction.
When a child
(a person up to 14 years of age) or a juvenile (in Croatia,
that is a person from 14 to 18 years of age) starts behaving
in a inappropriate or delinquent manner, society, in order
to protect itself as well as the child (juvenile), reacts
according to legal regulations.
There are many
institutions that prescribe, enforce or supervise measures
that are passed towards this population and have different
areas of work and goals.
By definition, an institution is: “(an) Establishment
that enforces socially accepted tasks and goals, regulates
and supervises relations and eases realisation of general
interest” (Petz, 1992).
Through that
theoretical definition we can observe the role of the Welfare
centre, a public institution in charge of welfare, which has
an eminent roll and extreme importance in the area of protection
and care for families and children. In order to reduce and
prevent cases and causes of social endangerment, Welfare supports
families and especially children in need. Article 82, subsection
2 of the Welfare law says: “The Welfare centre, on grounds
of public authority, can take care of children who run away
from home or an institution, carry out rearing measures towards
children with behavioural disorders that are separated from
their families or are still with them….” Subsection
3 says that the Welfare centre: “animates, organises
and carries out activities in order to prevent and restrain
social, family and personal problems; it conducts counselling
for marital and family problems, raising children, and adoption
and it participates in reducing problems with alcohol, drugs
or other addictions. Apart from these duties the Welfare centre
conducts other ways of protection:
1) Guardianship and adoption
2) Certificate disturbance degree in psychophysical development
3) Referring to care outside of one’s family:
a. placement in welfare institutions
b. placement in foster families
1) Carrying out court orders
2) Material protection
3) Enabling for independent work and life
In order to carry
out its duties in an efficient way, the Welfare centre is
divided into five specialised departments:
1) Department of general social work
2) Department of legal protection for families
3) Department of guardianship
4) Department for protection of children and youth with behavioural
disorders
5) Department for protection of psychologically and physically
impaired
In our paper
we will focus on work with families with juveniles with behavioural
disorders as well as juvenile delinquents.
When we think
about behavioural disorders in a general sense we think of
organic or biological as much as psychological and social
causes. Basically this term refers to behaviours which deviate
from the general field of “personal and social adaptation”
(Kovacevic, Stancic & Mejovšek, 1988).
Juvenile delinquency
can be defined as the appearance of various antisocial and
socially unacceptable behaviours, which are not in terms with
social norms and legislation (Petz, 1992).
One of the measures
and ways of protection that is applied towards children with
behavioural disorders and towards juvenile delinquents is
institutionalisation. That means that a juvenile or a child
is referred into a welfare institution (measure passed by
organ of guardianship) or a judiciary institution (by a court
sentence for juvenile offenders). The measure of separation
from the family is applied as a final measure or answer to
unacceptable behaviour of the juvenile or child.
The term institutionalisation
implies: “referral or placement of some person into
an institution for correction of behaviour, rehabilitation,
treatment and so on” (Petz, 1992).
There are many
institutions whose purpose and goal is the correction of behaviour
and rehabilitation of juvenile delinquents, children or youths
with behavioural disorders. These are:
• Homes for children and youth
• Raising centres
• Centres for raising, educating and enabling children
and youth
• Raising homes
• Raising institutions
• Disciplinary centres
• Special raising institutions
• Juvenile prisons
In all these
institutions the basic content of work is the socialisation,
resocialisation, raising and educating of juveniles. Although
counselling and professional work with parents is necessary,
these aspects of treatment are conducted very rarely or not
at all. For that reason, a juvenile’s successful social
reintegration after his dismissal from the institution is
brought into question.
As we said in
the beginning, family is the one that takes part in the beginning
of the problem and if we don’t include it in the process
of resolving a problem, it is very likely that all our achieved
results will be jeopardised when the juvenile gets back to
his or her unchanged family. The juvenile’s separation
from family is always a personally and socially complex and
painful process with uncertain results, so placement into
an institution must be the last measure that we undertake.
Because of that, many efforts are being put into the development
of measures and ways of protecting families and children by
focusing on preventing behavioural disorders and juvenile
delinquency. A main and mutual premise of those preventive
programs is: “It is more effective to prevent behavioural
disorders than to treat them.”
Guided with that
thought and keeping in mind all negative aspects of institutionalisation
we think that it is necessary to find different preventive
activities which will help “families in risk”
in resolving their problems and in providing conditions for
normal growth and development of children as well as prevent
the emerging of behavioural disorders. These activities have
primarily preventive characteristics but they can also be
seen as an alternative to institutionalisation as well.
Prevention is
society’s orientation to act before a problem appears
(primary prevention); identification and control of symptoms,
stopping further development of problems (secondary prevention);
and reliving further negative effects of an existing problem
(tertiary prevention).
Zagreb’s
Welfare centre office in Pešcenica within its regular
duties pays special attention to prevention of behavioural
problems and juvenile delinquency. In order to prevent and
remove causes and manifest forms of behaviour disorders, a
preventive program called “Modification of behaviour
through play” was created. This program was made for
children in primary schools but along with work with children
special attention is paid to work with their families. Working
with families is considered a way of prevention but also an
alternative to institutionalisation.
Because of the
great influence that family has on the raising and socialisation
of children with behaviour disorders and juvenile delinquents,
in our paper we will point out the theoretical frame of work
with families as well as the practical experiences gathered
through work on the program “Modification of behaviour
through play.”
Work with the
families of juveniles who are included in the institutional
treatment
Although we have
already talked about the importance and significance
of the family in a child’s upbringing and guidance,
let us point out once more
that family has a dominant and unavoidable role in the life
of every child.
In the circle of family and its members, a child learns models
of behaviour and
communication, and he or she forms attitudes and values towards
himself or herself and other people. In spite of expectations
and demands that the family should give the
child positive and quality contents, the opposite also happens
– the
child is in a dysfunctional and unhealthy family atmosphere
growing up in a negative and non-stimulating surrounding,
with the risk of
adopting negative patterns of behaviour. When it is necessary,
for the purpose
of protecting and helping the child, the measure of separating
the child
from the family and placing him in an appropriate institution
is applied.
Separating the child from its natural environment doesn’t
mean breaking up
with the family, particularly with the closest members of
the family like
parents, brothers and sisters.
In the Republic
of Croatia, institutional accommodation and treatment are
applied as a measure of family justice and criminal justice
protection of
children and adolescents. The decision to apply that measure
is brought by a team of experts in the Centre for Social Welfare,
based upon the Law of Social Welfare, the Family Law or the
Juvenile Court (in cases of adolescents who have committed
criminal acts), based upon the Law of Juvenile Courts.
Let us mention
the role of the Centre for Social Welfare, which is
significant not just in the period of making the decision
to separate a
child from the family, but also after the realisation of accommodation
and
during the child’s stay and the treatment in the institution.
The decision of separating the child should occur when all
other means of help and protection of the child and its family
have been exhausted; in other words,
if with applied measures and forms of help problems haven’t
been solved or
at least minimised (1.108-1.113 of the Family Law).
During the institutional
treatment the role of the Centre is to regularly
observe the child and achieved results of the treatment, to
have contact with the
employees of the institution and, in the end, to continue
to observe the
family. Observation of the family should include not just
periodical
contacts and visits, but also expertly guided help for parents
so they can
secure the terms for the child to return to the family.
Law regulates
obligations of the Centre through the duration of the
institutional measure. It states that "the Centre is
obligated to
observe the conditions in which the protégé
(child/adolescent) is
accommodated outside his own family, and in that purpose the
Centre is
obligated to visit him at least once in every six months"
(1.77 of the Law of
Social Welfare). However, it doesn’t state in legal
provisions what
obligations the Centre has regarding parents through the duration
of the
institutional treatment of their child. Practice shows that
the
continuation of observing the family and counsel work with
parents is
necessary if we want to reduce and eliminate family problems,
also if we
want to make preparations for the child to return to its family.
However,
non-definition of concrete obligations of expert workers in
the Centre
regarding work with parents contributes to the unevenness
in the
quality and quantity of contents and forms of expert work
contacts with
parents. They go from a range of rare and superficial contacts,
periodical
and formal visits to families to elaborated and defined counsel
work
which includes teaching, drawing attention to setbacks in
upbringing and
reinforcing the measure of custody on performing the parent’s
right.
The analysis
of these collective problems is not in the basic framework
of the contents of this paper, so we will say more about the
ways and contents of work of expert
workers in institutions for accommodation and treatment with
parents of
accommodated children and adolescents. We will look back not
only at what should be included in the contents of working
with parents, but also at the real picture of the cooperation
and communication between parents and expert workers in institutions
for accommodation of children and adolescents.
When a child
or an adolescent is separated from his family, it doesn’t
mean permanent and final abandonment of that family; it represents
temporary
removal from the natural family environment with the goal
and tendency of
returning, as soon as necessary requirements are met on the
child’s side as well as
on the family’s side and its functioning. The family
should be helped with
the intervention of authorised social and other services,
so that the family
can perform its upbringing role with quality and can prepare
for, once
again, accepting its separated child.
Numerous (mainly
foreign) research points out the need of expert work with
the family after the child has been separated, and returning
the child to the family when the requirements for that are
met.
In this way,
Whitaker (1992, according to Zizak & Koller-Trbovic, 1999)
states many practical possibilities to include the family
in the treatment
before, during and after the separation of the child from
the family. He
thinks that treatment programs which show satisfactory results
should be
focused on the interventions in the family as well, and not
just on the
behaviour of the child. He corroborates that statement with
the results of
numerous researches that have shown that after the child has
been brought
back to the same, unchanged family environment, it needs to
be separated
again for the same reasons it was separated the first time.
It is imperative
that the family is included and takes an active part in their
child’s institutional treatment, if it wants to function
once again with
quality.
Klomp (according
to Zizak & Koller-Trbovic, 1999) states that different
forms
of counselling and cooperation with the child and its parents
through the
duration of the institutional treatment can be organised by
the
institution itself, like:
• Formal and informal contact between parents and their
children, with
or without the presence of a pedagogue
• Parent/child counselling
• Intervention contacts
• Mutual activities, etc.
Bernheim (1985,
according to Zizak & Koller-Trbovic, 1999) states
the needs of the family while their child is accommodated
in the
institution: a combination of information, education, ventilation
of emotions and
support; contact with other families with similar experiences;
clearly set
expectations from them; the possibility of significant roles
in the treatment
of their children; and planning for dismissal.
Kiehn (1998,
according to Zizak & Koller-Trbovic, 1999) thinks that,
for the most
part, cooperation between the family and the institution should
be performed
by a special expert, a so-called parent’s counsellor,
who would establish
cooperation with parents even before the child would be accommodated
in an
institution.
Regarding our
authors, they are undivided in the judgement that work with
families during treatment (probably even before and after
treatment)
is necessary, but they also point out significant drawbacks
of that
aspect of work in our institutions. Lackovic and associates
(1994,
according to Zizak & Koller-Trbovic, 1999) point out the
negative
consequences of long-term accommodation of children in institutions
and
possibilities of relieving and totally eliminating them. As
one of the
solutions they recommend systematic planning of help for the
family from the
moment the child is accommodated in an institution where the
basic goal is
that the child returns to his/her family after treatment.
If that weren’t
possible, the alternative would be to accommodate him in a
foster family.
In the practice
of our institutions, we can see a significant discrepancy
between the needed and realised contents of work with the
family. We
can observe the causes of that condition through the aspect
of work
performed by experts themselves (who are employed in the institution)
and
through the motivation of parents (members of the family).
In
other words, the quality and the frequency of cooperation
and expert work
with the parents of adolescents depends on the experts themselves
and on their
motivation and willingness to invest additional effort in
order to improve
the cooperation between the institution and the family. A
significant fact
is that institutions don’t have clearly defined and
regulated contents,
forms and methods of work that are supposed to be conducted
with the parents
of their protégés in their statutes. In those
conditions, the expert work
with parents is left to the initiative and personal motivation
of the
employees in institutions.
In order to give
a complete insight and to get the real picture of how the
work with families is being run in institutions, we want to
show the practical experiences of work from some of our institutions.
The Centre for
upbringing in Karlovac accommodates children who come from
complete families in two-thirds of cases. The experts of this
institution point out
that their part in achieving and maintaining cooperation with
the parents
is often too little and insignificant without the proper authority.
That makes it
possible for parents to decide for themselves how much time
and in what
way they will solve the problems in the upbringing of their
child. The
pedagogues point out significant difficulties in communication
and
cooperation with parents whose children are accommodated in
a half-day
stay, which means that the child returns to his family every
day. In that
situation, if attitudes of parents and pedagogues are not
justified and do not
agree, the child receives double messages and the meaning
of the treatment
doesn’t or it is much more difficult to realise. The
greatest obstacles represent beliefs of parents about their
educational impossibility and their suspicion of and resistance
to the acceptance of help outside the family circle.
When a child
arrives to the Centre for upbringing in Karlovac, the pedagogues
try to systematically observe the occurrences in the family
as much as
they can. Observance is realised through contacts and cooperation
with
authorised medical, social, educational and other expert services
and
workers who were included in some form of work with the child
before his
accommodation to the institution. Significant forms of observing
the family
are interviews and contacts with parents, and also the information
they
receive directly from the child.
We will finish
this retrospection with a quote by Ms. Maja Vucinic-Knezevic:
"There is no cooperation. The care for the child should
be widespread, but closely coordinated and with less number
of participant." (Vucinic-Knezevic, 1994).
In the upbringing
home at Losinj, cooperation and work with parents is not
defined nor regulated. The relationship between parents and
employees is
superficial and one-sided and is being maintained in a way
that parents and
only parents are in contact with the institution and able
to inquire about their child. The
role of employees of this institution boils down to general
and bleak
information they give to parents who inquire about their child.
We can
conclude that the cooperation depends only on the willingness
of parents,
when it should be both-sided. In the upbringing reformatory
at Turopolje the
treatment of adolescents with complex and multiple emotional
and social
problems is being run. Family conditions from which these
adolescents come are also very difficult and problematic.
Part of these
adolescents comes from foster families or they were accommodated
in another
institution before they arrived in Turopolje. Some of them
don’t have their
own families and others came from incomplete or totally dysfunctional
families because of the existing pathology in behaviour or
character of their
family members.
Those mentioned
above represent significant difficulties to experts who work
in
Turopolje in their effort to make contact, cooperate and counsel
the
parents and other members of the family. In many cases the
parents
don’t want to cooperate with them. The reality is that
the cooperation is conducted sporadically. It is boiled down
to occasional telephone contacts,
interviews on the occasions when parents come to visit their
child or giving
information about their child on parents’ demands. Even
in this institution, systematic and planned work with parents
doesn’t exist.
In continuation
we will show the results of the research, which was
done by Zizak and Koller-Trbovic about the cooperation of
parents in our
institutions. The results are shown in table 1 (Zizak and
Koller-Trbovic,1994).
Table 1: Cooperation
with parents
Cooperation with Parents |
Total Percent |
DD |
CZO |
OU |
Written and telephone contacts with
children |
91.3 |
92.9 |
89.3 |
100 |
Parents can often visit their child |
80.4 |
78.6 |
82.1 |
75.0 |
The child goes home for weekend regulary |
37.0 |
42.9 |
35.7 |
25.0 |
Occasional visits to family for the
weekend and on holidays |
73.9 |
92.9 |
60.7 |
100 |
Organised work with parents who accept
it well |
10.9 |
14.3 |
10.7 |
0 |
Organised work with all parents |
2.2 |
7.1 |
0 |
0 |
Occaisonal organised work with all
parents |
4.3 |
0 |
7.1 |
0 |
Occaisonal organised work with some
parents |
39.1 |
42.9 |
39.3 |
25.0 |
Occasional visits to family and work
with parents |
23.9 |
42.9 |
17.9 |
0 |
No organised work with parents |
15.2 |
21.4 |
10.7 |
25.0 |
Other and/or without an answer |
15.2 |
14.3 |
10.7 |
50.0 |
Based on everything
we have shown so far, as well as the results of this
research, we can conclude that enabling the protégés
to contact their
parents by mail or phone, and through visits from parents,
or when
adolescents go to their families on weekends or holidays,
is mostly satisfactorily
organised and enabled in our institutions. Because of that
it becomes more
prominent that cooperation of institutions with the family
in the
form of expert treatment, therapeutic and educational work
is minimal.
It is particularly noticeable with institutions which, because
of their
dislocation and distance from the families’ place of
residence, often can’t
maintain more intensive and quality cooperation with the parents.
All of the given
facts contribute in weakening the conclusion that the quality
and success of institutional treatment is questionable and
doubtful.
Theoretical frame
of work with families
Much research
in the last ten years showed that the biggest influence on
child’s behaviour are interpersonal relations within
the family, while the social and economical status and family
structure has very little influence on the occurrence of behavioural
disorders and delinquency. By interpersonal relations we understand
relations between parents and the quality of parent-child
relations, style of raising and presence of asocial behaviour
within the family. Affirmed and evident influence of family
on the development and growing up of a child goes in favour
of our opinion that professional and directed work with family
must be, if not an independent segment of work with children
with behavioural disorders, at least a part of any institutional
or other measure. In order for work with families to be appropriately
and professionally done, it is necessary that every professional
who works with families is familiar with basic theories about
ways of family functioning. Only in that way can we accomplish
the goals that we set at the beginning of treatment.
Different theoretical
approaches observe the family from different aspects and all
of them look at only one or two segments of its functioning.
Each family’s uniqueness demands the professional to
use an approach appropriate to the specific family. Because
of that professionals should not be limited in their work
by the use of only one theoretical approach to family. Wide
theoretical knowledge gives them a possibility to choose between
different approaches and to use one or more of them depending
on the needs of a specific family. Because of that in this
part of our paper we will mention some basic points from a
couple of theoretical approaches to the family with emphasis
on those aspects that theories stress as very important in
family functioning or non-functioning.
Theory of social
exchange
The theory of
social exchange includes:
• a symbolic interaction theory that points out meanings
of communication and
roles within the family
• a social network theory which emphasises the importance
of the social network
as a social phenomenon that makes exchange of resources possible.
The theory of
social exchange defines two kinds of networks: the slightly
woven network and the thick network. The thickness of the
network is important when faced with stressing situations
(like losing a parent), and it is needed in situations and
ages when a person depends on the social environment. It is
not needed when a person is independent and has a need for
new relations in the social environment.
This theory,
by combining these two approaches, tries to explain people’s
behaviour in the social structure and it sees people as participants
in a market, who, in the process of exchanging resources,
apply criteria of reciprocity. Foa and Fra have divided these
resources into six groups: love, status, information, money,
goods and services. This theory says that relations between
people, even within family, are estimated on a cost-benefit
base. According to them, a person wants to maximise benefits
and minimise the cost of getting results.
reward –
price = result of action
In everyday life
that would mean that we do all things in order to benefit
from them and that people are the happiest when they get what
they think that they deserve (Jankovic, 1996).
This theoretical
approach points out two kinds of relationships: cooperative
and competitive. In a cooperative relationship, the husband
and wife are trying to increase their “joined profit”.
In a competitive relationship, the couple is trying to increase
individual profit that in most cases results with the exchange
of negative resources like hate and lies.
Therefore, when
working with a family it is necessary to learn about the family
values and things that can motivate them to certain actions.
Theory of conflicts
This theory points
out that the society isn’t basically cooperative but
is instead divided into individuals that are in constant conflict.
Marriage and family relationships are based on love, but the
bases of these relationships are power and conflict as well.
According to this approach, in conflicts, the side that is
more powerful wins.
Research workers
that accepted this theory believe that conflict is a natural
way of human behaviour and as such it is welcome. Family members
have different abilities, resources and power. Sources of
power are:
1. Rightness – is based on the patriarchal system, e.g.
“Father is always right.”
2. Money – “While you are living under our roof….”
“While you eat the food I buy….”
3. Goods – are defined as the potential for fulfilment
of needs
4. Physical power – it is mostly shown through these
words: “If you don’t do that, I will smack you!”
5. Mind – as capability of handling everyday situations
and choosing best solutions
6. Love – as a source of power it is shown by these
words: “If you really love me….” It represents
the strength by which one can force someone on something and
sometimes even on everything.
In order to fully
understand family relations, it is important to define the
sources of power by which family members are taking their
positions within the family.
Theory of sexes
This theory is
based on the assumption that relations between sexes depend
on relations of power and that men organised the society in
order to dominate women. It is focused on:
• specific behaviours that are defined as male or female
• work that is divided into men’s and women’s
jobs
• different institutions that give advantages to men
In some families
sex is a very important factor in family dynamics and one
segment of our work should be focused on changing that.
Theory of social
support
This theory points
out the importance of influence that social support has on
a family. Ries defines social support as a client’s
feeling that he is surrounded with people that take care of
them, feeling that he is among people who appreciate him and
with whom he is closely connected (Jankovic, 1996). Research
that was conducted within this theory proved that there is
a connection between social support and teenagers’ health,
parents’ professional promotion, physical health of
partners, length of recovery from illness and so on. This
theory focuses on positive ways of social interactions and
it points out the role that society has when its members face
stressful situations.
Some families,
especially those in large cities, are very isolated and lonely.
In a case of crises, they can’t depend on their relatives.
For them the process of solving problems is harder and much
more painful. In these situations it is necessary for the
family to ask for support from friends or some government
or non-government organisations.
Biologically-analytical
theory
Many scientists
have researched the influence that genetic heritage has on
human behaviour and physiology. One of the theories based
on the genetic heritage influence is the Schicksal analysis.
It points out that the choice of person that we love, our
ideals, friends, profession, sicknesses or the way we die
is determined by our genes.
Szondi, in ancestor
analysis, says that in a way, through the recessive genes
our ancestors live in us and dictate our important physical
and psychological characteristics and our individual way of
functioning. He says that the family unconscious dictates
the most important decisions in the area of people’s
social functioning.
Because of that
it is important to know the history of each family. Sometimes
the disturbance doesn’t have to be caused by genes but
it is good to have all information that can help us in creating
a complete family picture.
Systematic approach
to family
This theoretical
approach points out that a family is a system connected and
dependent on all other subsystems (family members) and intersystem
(society). Because of that, if a problem with one member appears,
the whole interaction and behaviour of all members will be
changed. Family subsystems include the parental system, the
child(ren) system and the parent-child(ren) system.
Family systems with disturbed interactions have vague and
negative sources, meaning and content of messages and basic
relations. The system has its boundaries, which can be physical,
psychological or social and any attack on them will lead to
reaction in all parts of the system. To keep itself going
and to solve critical situations, the system uses mechanisms
of control and it changes according to new conditions.
Relations between
partners can be:
• Symmetric: characterised by constant conflict of partners
who are fighting for the position of the better/first family
member.
• Complementary: characterised by inequality, which
means that one of the partners offers something that the other
one doesn’t have at all.
• Reciprocal: symmetric and complementary relations
are combined and that enables partners for optimal functioning.
• Triad: representing a union of two people against
a third person. Usually that is a parent with a child or children
against the other parent. This union complicates conflicts
because it is impossible for the child to ally with one parent
against the other. A union of parents versus children or children
versus parents is rare. A possible outcome of this “game”
can be that one parent ties the child strongly to himself
and pushes the other parent out of the family system, driving
him/her to different kinds of pathology. The parent who wins
is usually the weaker part of the system and the child then
takes over the duty to care about him/her. This kind of relation
has the tendency to repeat itself from generation to generation.
Double bind messages
are an important part of this theory. They are double messages
that have two completely different claims at the same time,
sent simultaneously by one or more persons between who there
is an authority-submission relation. That kind of message
has two contradictory claims, one sounds authoritative, and
the other is opposite and mostly directed in a non-verbal
way. Open and meaningful communication in the family is necessary
for healthy and qualitative family interaction. It is important
to recognise and explain double bind messages and their source,
and to resolve their consequences.
This theory points
out a need for recognition of complete functioning of the
family, its atmosphere and environment. To be able to do that
we must learn about all three levels of family functioning:
the individual level (micro), the family level (mezzo) and
the community level (macro). For example, if a pupil has a
behavioural disorder, a professional must act on the child’s
personal level and help him to overcome emotional and cognitive
obstacles. That would be the micro level. At the same time
he must work with his family to eliminate causes of that behaviour
(mezzo level) and he must also intervene in the school (macro
level).
It is very important
that a professional directs his attention at finding, inciting
and reinforcing positive family resources.
Every theory
sees family functioning problems from its point of view and
it is almost impossible to find a theory that we could say
found all the answers. But we shouldn’t put all these
theories aside and pronounce them useless because of that.
It is important to accept the fact that the family is a very
complicated, always changing and developing phenomenon that
always asks for adjustments of approaches and ways of working
with families.
Forms of work
with families in the program “Modification of Behaviour
Through Play”
In this part
of our work we will show the forms of work with families
within the framework of realising the preventive program,
"Modification of
Behaviour through Play.”
According to
the theory of a systematic approach to the family, in order
to
help the child we need to work on all three levels of functioning:
micro,
mezzo and macro. The preventive program "Modification
of Behavior through
Play" applies that in practice by organising its preventive
work through
these segments of work:
Work with the child
1. group work
2. individual work
Work with the family
1. parent conferences (group work)
2. visits to the family (individual work)
Work with the school staff
1. attending conferences
2. individual contact
Work with other services
1. Centres for social welfare
2. faculties
3. non-government organisations
The program includes
all levels of action, but as it is in the first
plan of this presentation work with the families, we will
show and explain
the specific qualities of work with families. We think that
the applied
forms of work with families and concrete experiences obtained
during the
realisation of this program can be used for any other form
of work with the
family in the framework of some institutional or non-institutional
treatment. Work with the family is maintained through parent
conferences and visits to
families. Both forms of work are done once a month, and visits
to
the family are done more often if needed. The plan and the
program of
work with families is written out at the beginning of the
school year by group
leaders using information and knowledge about current and
possible family problems
and their own insight on the functioning of every particular
family.
Parent meetings
Within the regular
school plan and program class teachers organise parent meetings
during the year. This kind of parent meetings mostly deals
with problems in school success and behavioural problems of
children. During these meetings parents are often called out
because of something their child did or didn’t do. Parents,
in front of all the other parents, are being accused as bad
parents that don’t take care of their children. For
the most part, nobody tells them what to do to make changes
so that they could solve a problem. To parents that kind of
situation is very unpleasant and frustrating and the final
result is that parents avoid coming to school. Furthermore,
their absence from meetings just proves the teacher’s
point that they are lousy and irresponsible parents. So, on
one hand is the distrust and criticism of class teachers and
on the other hand are frustration, ignorance and insecurity
of the parents. This results in a low-quality superficial
relationship that doesn’t help the child, parent or
teacher in solving problems. These situations prove that the
other side is always guilty and that nothing can be done.
In this case nobody took the responsibility and the magic
circle was created.
In order to change
that, to help parents and teachers in handling a child and
in order to improve communication between parents and teachers,
the program “modification of behaviour through play”
included organisation of parent meetings.
Experts who work
in this program approach the parents aiming to teach and provide
help; they are guided with the thought that problems can be
solved. In their work with parents they start from the conviction
that parents love their children, that they want what is best
for them, but also they understand that parents are sometimes
limited in their capabilities and knowledge, that they make
mistakes and are sometimes unable to resolve problem situations.
An approach in which parents see acceptance, respect, and
appreciation results with qualitative, open and trusting relationships
in which parents are willing to hear suggestions and accept
offered help.
Goals of parent
meetings
• Education
– Giving parents knowledge about raising children. Group
leaders choose subjects and themes they decide are most important
to the parents with whom they work.
• Exchange of experience – Parents, between themselves,
comment and estimate personal experiences in the process of
finding and applying different ways of solving problems.
• Mutual parents’ support – Parents support
each other, realising that they are not the only ones with
those problems, which is a very important part of working
with parents.
• Reflection and evaluation – Through talking
about their problems and ways of resolving them and by analysing
their actions parents face tough self-perception and self-evaluation.
They are asked to look for new ways of solving problems and
to change ineffective behaviours.
• Developing the parents’ habit of coming to school
regularly and in that way, show their responsibility and care
for the child.
The way of organising
parents’ meetings and its realisation depends on group
leaders, who mostly organise theme workshops on subjects that
they discuss with children in group meetings. Parents are
asked to act, draw, write, discuss or just talk. Parents are
often surprised with this kind of work after the first meeting
but they are also extremely satisfied because they have been
listened to for the first time and they were given a possibility
to learn new ways of solving a problem. Also, parents are
not brought into a situation in which they are blamed because
of their child’s grades or behaviour. Some of the parents
hear for the first time some positive things about their child.
Although parent
meetings are organised for the parents and mostly focus on
the problems and emotions of parents, group leaders sometimes
organise parent meetings in which the children are present
as well. It was noticed that joined meetings improve communication
between parents and children. Children and parents openly
talk about their actions and problems. Both sides are given
the opportunity to be heard and that gives them a feeling
of importance and a possibility to compare different opinions
and to find new solutions that would suit both sides.
This kind of
meeting is very dynamic and children very gladly participate
even when their parent isn’t present.
Motivation for
attending parents meetings
Even though parents
who come to the meetings are satisfied and thankful for this
kind of work, a big problem of group leaders is motivating
parents to regularly attend them. In order to get parents
to come, group leaders are finding many ways of motivating
them. Some ideas are:
• Timely written invitations with marked themes and
an explanation of its importance. Some leaders ask parents
to send back signed invitations through their children if
they will come to the meeting.
• Timely invitations to the meeting by telephone. Leaders
ask for the confirmation of their coming or explanation of
the reasons of their absence.
• Conversation about the subject of the meeting and
its importance during the leader’s visits to the families.
• Children are asked to remind their parents of the
meeting. We noticed that children can easier “force”
their parents to come to a meeting because it is important
to children that their parents are present especially if that
means that they can participate in the meeting as well.
• Parents are asked to choose the subjects of the parent
meetings and the time when the meeting will be conducted.
• If a parent doesn’t come to a parent meeting
one of the group leaders after the meeting goes to visit the
family and asks for a reason of their absence. With that they
want to stress the importance of their coming but also to
show how irresponsible their absence was.
• We noticed that repeating a parents’ meeting
if half of the parents wasn’t present is ineffective
because those parents didn’t come to the repeated meeting
either.
• We found it efficient to leave the practical side
of organisation of a meeting (like time, place, etc.) to one
of the motivated parents. Meetings in that case were held
in his or her house in an informal atmosphere. That parent
reminded other parents of the day and time of a meeting.
Table 2: Parents’ attendance at parents meetings
Primary school
August Cesarec Vuko-merec Dr. Vinko ganec Petar Prera-dovic
Zapre-šic Lovro
Pl.
Matacic Vuko-
merac
Number of children in the group
11
8
10
10
9
11
8
Number of parents’ meetings held
7
7
5
7
6
5
4
Average number of parents at meetings
2
4
6
5
4
5
5
Number of repeated parents’ meetings
6
2
0
2
0
1
1
Average number of parents at repeted meetings
0
3
0
2
0
1
3
Group leaders
state that the reasons why parents aren’t coming to
the meetings are work, indifference, health problems and care
for young children. It is interesting that some parents use
these reasons as an excuse while for other (obviously motivated)
parents those same situations don’t prevent them from
attending parents’ meetings.
In connection
with parents’ meetings there is another problem: the
demotivation of the group leaders in organising parents meetings
if only a small number of parents attend the meetings.
Themes of parents
meetings
Family dynamic,
its relations and mutual influence of family members cause
mutual family responsibility. In a family, problems shouldn’t
be treated as “mine” or “yours” but
as mutual. They ask for a mutual effort of all family members
and use of the whole family potential (Jull, 1995).
In work with
parents it is important to stress their responsibility and
the need for their participation in solving family problems.
Parents sometimes tend to turn away from problems, saying:
“There is nothing more that I can do here,” “I
already tried everything,” or “He is simply incorrigible.”
They tend to give up or shift responsibility on someone else
like the school or the child’s friends, expecting that
someone else will resolve their problems. Parents show resistance
when facing their failures in raising their children so it
is hard for them to see their mistakes and to take their share
of responsibility for the child’s behaviour.
For that reason, work with parents includes work on recognising
and understanding processes in the family and learning to
freely express one’s opinion and emotions. Here are
some of the themes from the wide spectrum of working with
the family:
• Expectations parents have for their children, themselves
and their spouses
• “How I see my child”
• Discipline in groups and at home
• Raising actions of parents
• “How well do I know my child?”
• Relations in the family
• Communication in the family
• “My needs”
• “My child’s needs”
• Emotions- how to recognise, understand and accept
them
• “What do I do when a child is angry at me?”
• “What do I do when I’m angry at a child?”
In great number
of families, children, even at very early ages, send signals
through their behaviour that there is a problem within their
family. Usually, those problems are not serious or pathological
but just inappropriate and inefficient parent actions towards
a child. These are often caused by a parent’s ignorance
of basic knowledge about raising or having wrong ideas about
raising children that they learned from their parents. Some
of those parents were themselves raised in families in which
their parents treated them badly (Jull, 1995).
By informing,
teaching and counselling them, such parents are helped to
learn necessary information about raising children and the
processes of their growing up. In that way they get a chance
to correct their behaviour and a possibility to understand
their child better. For that reason, at parents’ meetings
we talk about these subjects:
• Parents’ expectations (for this program, for
their child)
• Importance of praising
• Risk factors and factors of protection
• How to talk to the children qualitatively
• How to motivate a child to fulfil its school obligations
• How to develop the child’s working habits
• Importance of cooperation with the school
• Parents’ influence on developing the child’s
self-respect
• Drugs and other addictions
• Process of non-violent problem resolution
• Sexual maturing
• Raising failures and difficulties
Visits to the
family
Visits to the
family are a specific part of the work with families of the
program MPPI, so they are one of its most important aspects.
Different
from parent conferences, which have a general educational
and counseling
character and where the work is based on the principles of
group work,
on visits we talk about the specific problems which occur
in that family
and the possibilities of solving them. Along with direct contact
and a stay in the family environment, group leaders can get
more insight into many aspects and circumstances of the life
of the particular family (1998, a group of authors). Some
things they gain insight into include the family atmosphere
and structure, the relationship between its members and the
characteristics and conditions of the family's residential
community.
Purposes of visits
to the family
• Detailed
information of the conditions the family lives in
• Insight into family relationships
• Giving information to other institutions that can
provide adequate help
to the family
• The exchange of information of the child’s behaviour
• Education on children’s upbringing
• Establishing more intimate contact with family members
• Giving emotional and expert support to parents
On the occasion of visits to the family, leaders and parents
get to know
each other better, so it’s possible for information
to flow. The leaders
give information to parents about their child’s behavior
in the group, they
give their remarks, suggest certain procedures and so on.
If it’s
necessary (to eliminate possible obscurities and hesitations
of parents
regarding the entire purpose, goal and methods of work with
the children in
the program), they are given additional explanations and information.
Sometimes the children are present at the interviews with
their parents.
During visits
to the family, on the leaders’ initiative, parents "get
the
possibility to open themselves to the outside world and get
the image of
themselves from outer observers" (1998, a group of authors).
Leaders also
promote all positive processes, activities and relationships
they come
across during their visits. The role and obligations of group
leaders demand
that they prepare themselves thoroughly for visits, especially
the first
visit to the family, when they make foundations for future
relationships.
The leaders must have good capabilities of perceiving details
and
relationships because they can get more answers to the questions
regarding
that family by monitoring that family closely rather than
through direct
and open conversation. The leaders must have excellent communication
skills,
good capability of perception and flexibility. We can conclude
with
justification that the quality of the cooperation with the
family depends
mostly on the capabilities, knowledge and engagement of group
leaders.
Many experts who
work with families proudly point out that they are always
on
the children’s side, which presents, if we observe it
professionally,
one-sidedness, unobjectivity and a biased attitude towards
parents. An expert
must be objective; he or she must be able to perceive relationships
and processes
between parents and children and not lean only to one side.
Because of
those reasons, leaders - no matter how close they become with
parents - must
keep their professional distance. This allows them to objectively
observe problems in the family.
Subjects of visits
to the family
What is discussed
with parents during visits to the family
can be divided into two subjects: those which refer to the
general
situation in the family and those which refer to children
themselves as well as their
their upbringing.
Subjects that
refer to the child and upbringing procedures of parents
are:
• The behaviour of the child in the group
• The child’s self-esteem
• Praising the child for his behaviour
• The motivation for learning
• Punishment
• Consistency of parents about reinforcing rules and
agreements
• Methods of upbringing and parents’ procedures
For a long time
people thought that it was unprofessional to sit down with
clients and simply talk about life. But group leaders, in
open and honest conversation, can talk to parents and encourage
them to observe their flaws in the upbringing processes and
work out the solutions themselves. In that way, we can create
a warm
relationship and an atmosphere of trust in which we open the
conversation
about vital and delicate problems and in which parents can
feel our concern
and our suggestion to their problems (Jull, 1995).
Some of the general
contents of conversations between leaders and parents
not directly regarding the child are:
• The medical condition of family members
• Financial problems of the family
• Significant news in the life of the family
Atmosphere during
the family visits
Thanks to the
communicative efforts, empathy and emotional warmth of
leaders, parents show great interest for cooperation, which
sometimes
crosses the bounds of an official relationship. Leaders are
often invited
to some important family gatherings.
Leaders, emphasising
the interest and cooperation of parents, notice that
the level of quality of cooperation and relationships indirectly
reflects
the activity and cooperation of children themselves. That
is just more
proof that we need to work with the whole family in order
to achieve wanted
results.
We must definitely
have in mind that work with families demands special
tolerance, persistence and clear definition of objectives
in our work.
Besides that, we need to maintain objectivity and reality
in our
estimation of possibilities to achieve changes. The leader
is an expert
person that has a professional obligation to help and it is
his/her
responsibility to do the job with quality and expertise. Sometimes,
even with all
that trouble and effort, the expected results fail to come,
which can be
discouraging. Because of that it is important to know what
our
responsibility is and we must remind ourselves we cannot live
other people’s lives.
The research
Towards the end
of this school year, we have conducted research called
“Work with the family on the preventive program Modification
of behaviour
through play.” The research was initiated with the purpose
of evaluating the
MPPI program and to gather and analyse the data of the work
with the family in
the program’s framework. We have set the following specific
objectives in our research:
1. To find the opinion and attitudes of parents concerning
our work with
the family as a whole
2. Parents’ evaluation of the effectiveness of parents’
meetings that
were held and the evaluation of visits to the family with
the synthesis of
their suggestions for our future work
3. To find out the reasons of poor attendance to these meetings
Subjects of the
research were parents of the children included in the group
work within the framework of the program MPPI in the area
of Pešcenica and
the town Zapresic, and leaders of group work in the MPPI program.
The total number of questioned subjects was 65 and the number
of leaders of group work was 16.
Set of instruments:
written questionnaire (for parents and group leaders); the
questionnaire was made up of ten different questions by type:
six open type questions, three multiple-choice questions and
one scale of estimation. We decided for a larger number of
open type questions because we wanted to avoid "ready"
answers, which can be suggestible (we wanted to get as many
authentic answers and parents’ suggestions as possible).
The time of realisation
of the research: the research was conducted from May
1 until June 1, 2001.
The way the research
was conducted: the questionnaire was given to group
leaders with instructions on how to help parents fill it out
the
questionnaire and eventual obscurities were explained beforehand.
The questionnaires were given to the parents with the remark
that the data will be anonymous and used
with the purpose of evaluating the program as a foundation
to further
improvement of expert work.
Processing of
the given data: answers to the open type questions are grouped
in
categories and alternative answers are presented in percentages.
Results of the
research
The first area
of the research was regarding the establishment of positive
aspects of the work of leaders with the family using the following
questions:
1. Name at least three things with which you are satisfied
in your cooperation with group leaders.
2. Which themes were proven most useful to you and were elaborated
upon at parents’ meetings?
3. Grade how much you are satisfied with the way of leading
parents’ meetings.
4. Which topics were proven useful and talked about during
the leaders’ visits to your home?
We grouped the
answers to the first question in these three categories and
ranked them according to their frequency in answers:
Table 3: Estimation
of positive aspects of leaders’ work with the family
Estimation of positive aspects of leaders’ work with
the family Percent
Professional skills and the way of the leaders’ work
75.1
The leaders’ personality 20.9
Technical conditions 3.9
It is clearly
visible from the table that the parents are satisfied the
most
with the professional skills and the way of the leaders’
work. Their satisfaction
is in regards to:
• The way of communication of leaders
• The leaders’ accessibility
• The choice of subjects of conversation
• The expert work on solving problems
• The interest and the care of the leaders for the child
• The involvement of leaders
• Giving support, etc.
We put the reasons
above into the category of professional skills and the way
of leaders’ work. The parents often stated some characteristics
of leaders which especially impressed them. We will mention
just a few: spontaneity, patience, understanding, kindness,
reliability, complaisance, etc. In the category of technical
conditions we put the way parents’ meetings were arranged,
shifting of technical terms and organisation of the work.
The themes of parents’ meetings, which the parents have
estimated and pointed out as the most useful are:
1. The prevention of addictions
2. Quality learning
3. Communication with the child
4. Quality upbringing
We think that
the parents were attracted to these themes by their actuality
(the prevention of addictions) and their tight connection
to contents of
real, every-day problems which the parents must face (problems
with the child failing school, with communication in the family
and with the
upbringing of their child). From this we can conclude that
a proper choice
of contents for parents’ meetings can motivate the parents
and their
readiness for cooperation.
Table 4: The scale
of estimation for the parents’ satisfaction with parents’
meetings
The satisfaction with parents’ meetings Percent
Markedly satisfied 76.9
Satisfied 15.4
Neither satisfied nor unsatisfied 1.5
Unsatisfied 0
Markedly unsatisfied 0
Did not estimate 6.1
From this data
we can see that most parents are markedly satisfied with the
way of leading the parents’ meetings, which represents
a positive feedback
to us as group leaders about our work methods. It’s
a delusion to think that
parents don’t want to try alternative methods of work.
The given results
confirm this as well as they confirm that we approached parents
in the
right way, that we selected the right topics and presented
them in an
interesting way.
Parents selected
these topics as most useful, and we talked about them
during our visits to the family:
1. The child’s behaviour
2. Learning
3. Addictions
4. Upbringing methods
We see from the
given answers that the topics which parents pointed out the
most and were elaborated upon during the visits to the family
are very similar
to topics which they pointed out as the most interesting at
parents’
meetings. Ranking the topics on how interesting they were
is somewhat
different because in family visits the focus is more on the
specifics of
every child and his or her behaviour and school success. We
talk less about general
topics as addictions because most of the children don’t
have problems with
that at this time. Upbringing methods as the topic of conversation
is
positioned last because parents are interested in what upbringing
methods
are successful, but they have a hard time admitting their
own flaws and
oversights in upbringing.
In the next part
of the research we focused on the examination of the things
the parents didn’t like in the leaders’ work with
the family and on
defining the reasons for poor attendance to parents’
meetings. The
questions are:
1. What would you change in your cooperation with group leaders?
2. What are your suggestions for improving the cooperation
with group leaders?
3. Who or what could affect the regularity of your attendance
to parents’ meetings?
4. How many parents’ meetings did you attend?
5. What were the reasons for your absences from parents’
meetings?
6. In what way did group leaders interest you and compel you
to
attend parents’ meetings?
Table 5: Parents’
remarks
Parents’ remarks Percent
The way of communication 1.4
The way of arranging visits 11.4
The way of arranging parents’ meetings 8.6
The way of counselling and eventual suggestions to flaws in
upbringing 7.1
Nothing 64.3
Miscellaneous 5.7
It is noticeable
from the results that most of the parents have no remarks
on their cooperation with group leaders. A total of 11.4 percent
of parents think that
visits should be announced and arranged in advance. Unannounced
visits to
the family don’t suit all of the parents but they are
conducted to come
upon the real situation in the family. 7.1 percent of parents
stated that they would change the way leaders counsel them
and how they suggest flaws in their upbringing. We can explain
that with the fact that some parents have a hard time facing
their own difficulties and problems in upbringing. To us it’s
a signal that in some cases we didn’t find the adequate
approach to parents and that is something to work on in the
future.
Table 6: Attendance
at parents’ meetings
Number of parents’ meetings Attendance of parents (percent)
6 or more 15.4
From 3 to 5 50.8
From 1 to 2 27.7
None 6.1
According to
the data in table 6 we conclude that most of the parents
attended at least half of the arranged parents’ meetings.
Table 7: The reasons
of absence from parents’ meetings
The reasons of absence Frequency of reasons (percent)
Medical reasons 10.3
Business engagements 42.3
Family engagements 30.8
Indifference 1.3
I forgot 1.3
They called us too late 2.6
Nothing 10.3
Miscellaneous 1.3
The most frequent
reasons of parents’ absence are family engagements,
business engagements and medical reasons.
We wanted to
find out how leaders interested the parents in attending the
parents’ meetings, and the most frequent answers of
parents were: with interesting subjects, with their methods
of work and with their personality.
At the end of
the elaboration of this research, we have left the data regarding
the reasons that can affect the attendance of parents to parents’
meetings and their propositions how to improve the cooperation
between parents and group leaders.
Parents did or
did not attend meetings according to various negative (demotivating)
and positive (motivating) factors. For example, parents didn’t
come to the meetings because they expected better results
with their child in learning and behaviour, they wanted more
interesting topics, or they were prevented because of family,
business or medical reasons. On the other hand, they attended
parents’ meetings because they felt comfortable, because
of the educational character of meetings, they had the desire
to help their child and because of their conscience and responsibility,
etc.
The parents stated these propositions on how to improve the
co-operation with group leaders:
• Harsher control and reviewing
• Parents’ meetings with children
• Longer and more frequent visits to the family
• More discussions about drugs
• More understanding for severe emotional and economical
problems in the family
• Organised work with more groups of children
• More frequent meetings with children
• More field trips
Parents have
stated many propositions that are extremely valuable to us.
This information will be of great practical use in the further
creation of our work, in the field of cooperation and work
with the family, as well as in the field of the work with
children. Some of the parents suggested that we work more
with children and spend less time with them (parents), and
that we don’t visit them at their homes, which contributes
to the fact that parents have a hard time of accepting their
part of the responsibility for the child’s behaviour.
Conclusion
Family has a
big and important influence on the development of a young
person. The role of the family, especially the parents’
role in raising children, can be seen through many commitments
that ask for certain knowledge and a willingness to learn.
To be an active participant and moderator in the process of
child rearing and the development of a person implies considerable
responsibility and serious duty that it is requested of each
parent. However, some parents, due to all sorts of reasons,
are not capable to fulfil them by themselves and need professional
help from adequate social services.
Help from society
can be seen through a variety of measures and actions directed
at helping the family. Help and protection can be enforced
in institutions as well as outside of them.
A child’s
separation from the family as an institutional measure can
result in negative effects on the child and the family. One
of the important problems is the absence or lack of professional
work with parents during the child’s placement in the
institution. The child’s separation from the natural
family environment is always a stressful experience that leaves
big marks on the child’s emotional development. New
research is not just trying to find new ways of relieving
and removing negative aspects of institutionalisation but
they are trying to find more effective and useful ways of
help and treatment that can be conducted outside of institutions.
The preventive program “Modification of behaviour through
play” represents a way of working professionally with
the children and their parents outside of an institution.
The experience of working with the parents through meetings
and family visits has confirmed that this kind of work makes
sense and gives good results. For the future, it opens new
prospectives for finding other alternative measures that could
be conducted outside of institutions.
References (please try to provide fuller information)
1. Ajdukovic,
M.: “Style of raising as a factor of delinquent behaviour”,
applied psychology 11/1990.
2. Jankovic, J.: “Approaching to the family”,
Zagreb, 1996.
3. Jull, J.: “Talking to the family: perspectives and
processes”, Zagreb, 1995.
4. Mejovšek, M., Kovacevic, Stancic, V. 1988.
5. Family law, Public paper no. 81, 1998.
6. Petz, B.: “Physiological dictionary”, Zagreb,
1992.
7. Group of authors: Modification of behaviour through play”,
Zagreb, 1998.
8. Group of authors: “Collection of papers- Our family
today”, Ministry of work and welfare, Zagreb, 1994.
9. Group of authors: ”Collection of papers- Raising
in homes for juvenile’s –How to go further?”,
Ministry of work and welfare, Zagreb, 1999.
10. Welfare law, Public paper no. 73, 1997.
11. Juvenile court’s law, Public paper no. 81, 1997.
12. iak, A. i Koller-Trbovic, N.: “Raising
and treatment in welfare institutions- descriptive study”,
Zagreb, 1999.
Back
to Top
Copyright
for the I.U.C. Journal of Social Work Theory and Practice
is owned by the Social Work Program, Department of Social
Relations and Services, Bemidji State University, Bemidji,
Minnesota, USA. One copy may be made (printed) for personal
use; teachers may make multiple copies for student use if
the copies are made available to students without charge.
Permission must be secured from the editors for sale of any
copies of articles or for any commercial use of the material
published in the Journal.