First year after care: How are they doing and what contributes to their life satisfaction? Tamar...
21
First year after care: How are they doing and what contributes to their life satisfaction? Tamar Dinisman Prof. Anat Zeira The Hebrew University of Jerusalem A longitudinal research
-
Upload
roberta-snow -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of First year after care: How are they doing and what contributes to their life satisfaction? Tamar...
First year after care: How are they doing and what
contributes to their life satisfaction?
Tamar DinismanProf. Anat ZeiraThe Hebrew University of Jerusalem
A longitudinal research
Why care leavers?
The change in young people transition to independent lives (Arnett, 2000; Schoeni & Ross, 2005)
Different conditions for youth aging out of care:◦Abrupt move ◦Lack of emotional and financial support from
parents (Cashmore & Paxman, 1996; Courtney & Dworsky, 2006; Wade, 2008 )
Gloomy picture of care leavers from varied countries (e.g. Stein & Munro, 2008)
Distinctive services and policy in numerous countries
Knowledge gaps
The Israeli situation
No legislation or general policyOut-of-home placement in Israel:
◦Vast majority to residential care (80%)◦Two main types of residential care:
treatment-oriented and educational-oriented
The different transition to independent living
The present study is a further step in the growing body of knowledge (Benbenishty, Schiff, Zeira)
Part of longitudinal survey
The purpose of the study
To examine the condition of care leavers on their first year after care, in six life domains
To Identify factors, on the verge of leaving care, which contribute to their successful adjustment a year after◦The current presentation: Life
satisfaction
T1
T2
Work experience
Education functioning
Self esteem
Origin
Individualcharacteristic
Staff Peers
Close relative
Birth parents
Social supportcharacteristic
Participate in ILPs
ILPsin the setting
Type
Well being
Normative behavior
Social support
Transition to Independent living
Economic security
Housing stability
Adaptation to the army
Institutional characteristic
Methods
First step 272 Second step: 234
26 residential settings in Israel
Main sample characteristics:◦average age 19 (SD= 1.00)◦60.7% boys◦23% Israeli born, 42.8% Ethiopian,21.2%
former Soviet UnionProcedures:
◦First step: self-administered survey in the settings & interviews with the directors about ILPs held in their settings
◦Second step: phone interview
Instruments
Independent variables: Valid and new instruments
Dependent variables:
Well being
Normative behavior
Social support
Economic security
Housing stability
Adaptation to the army
Instruments
Independent variables: Valid and new instruments
Independent variables:
Well being
Normative behavior
Social support
Economic security
Housing stability
Adaptation to the army
Adaptation to the unit and duty
Social adaptation
Instruments Independent variables: Valid and
new instrumentsIndependent variables:
Well being
Normative behavior
Social support
Housing stability
Adaptation to the army
Economic security
Economic hardships: Debts Insufficient money Cutbacks Subjective evaluation of
general economic state
Instruments Independent variables: Valid and
new instrumentsIndependent variables:
Well being
Normative behavior
Social support
Economic security
Adaptation to the army
Housing stability
Current accommodation
Accommodation stability in the future
Instruments Independent variables: Valid and
new instrumentsIndependent variables:
Well being
Normative behavior
Economic security
Adaptation to the army
Social support
Relationship with birth parents
Peer support Contact with
residential staff
Housing stability
Instruments and AnalysisIndependent variables: Valid and
new instrumentsIndependent variables:
Well being
Economic security
Adaptation to the army
Normative behavior
Binge drinking Involvement
with the police
Housing stability
Social support
Instruments and AnalysisIndependent variables: Valid and
new instrumentsIndependent variables:
Economic security
Adaptation to the army
Well being
Life satisfaction (7-SLSS) 1-4
Mental health
Housing stability
Social support
Normative behavior
Results:The first year
Fare adjustment in most life domainsNumerous difficulties in two domains
◦Economic security◦Future housing stability
Small group with critical difficulties:◦Lack of permanent activity◦Absence of stable accommodation◦Delinquency◦Binge drinking◦Insufficient contact with birth parents
Main activity
61%
9%
12%
8%
3% 4% 2%
ArmyNational serviceWorkStudyVolunteering yearPre military academy
Normative Behavior
82% did not engage in binge drinking in the last month
8.3% were engaged in binge drinking
8.8% were involved with the police
Social support network
6.6% do not have any contact with their birth parentsSuitable quality of relation with parents: M = 3.65 SD = 0.72 (1-5)Large amount of peer support: M = 4.24 SD = 0.74 (1-5)67.5% have some contact with staff
Life satisfaction (1-4): M = 2.8 SD = 0.67
Economic hardships
25% 23%
35%
18%
Four Three One-two Non
Housing stability 7.9%
experienced lack in place to stay, since they
left care
4.4% (10 youth) did not
have a place to stay during the
research
24.6% will not be able to stay in their current place for long
Factors contribute to life satisfaction
***p < 0.001
Model 1 Model 2 Variables B β B βLearning difficulties -.16 -.22*** -.17 -.23***Self-esteem .27 .21*** .16 .12Positive mother-relationship
.21 .32***
Peer support - tangible -.12 -.14 Peer support - emotional -.06 -.07Peer support - affection -.06 -.08Peer support - advice .16 .21Peer support - interactions .06 .06Staff support - affection .11 .12
F(df) 9.89(2,202)*** 5.52(9,195)***R2 .09 .20
Δ R2 --- .11***
Discussion and Implications
Is it necessary to establish services and policy for care leavers?
Who is prone to hardships?What are the protective factor?The importance of the relationship
with birth parents during care and after
Thank you!Dinisman, T., & Zeira, A. (2011). The
contribution of individual, social support and institutional characteristics to perceived readiness to leave care in Israel: An ecological perspective. British Journal of Social Work.
