변수 Haz. Ratio
일시보호(ref.장기보호) 0.0037 1.0037
(0.2355) (0.2364)
친족보호(ref.장기보호) 0.1126 1.1192
(0.2488) (0.2785)
기타(ref.장기보호) 0.2369 1.2673
(0.2752) (0.3488)
시설전원 횟수 0.1705 1.1859#
(0.0896) (0.1063)
가정외보호기간_1(ref.1달 이내) -0.2642 0.7679
(0.1893) (0.1454)
가정외보호기간_2(ref.1달 이내) -0.3309 0.7183
(0.2896) (0.2080)
가정외보호기간_3(ref.1달 이내) -1.1758 0.3086**
(0.3599) (0.1111)
가정외보호기간_4(ref.1달 이내) -2.1528 0.1162#
(1.1686) (0.1357)
아동 사례관리 기간 0.0012 1.0012
(0.0010) (0.0010)
행위자 사례관리 기간 -0.0006 0.9994
(0.0009) (0.0009)
아동 사후사례관리(ref.비수혜) 0.4219 1.5248
(0.3942) (0.6010)
행위자 사후사례관리(ref.비수혜) -0.3566 0.7001
(0.5788) (0.4052)
사례관리기관근접성(ref.비근접) -0.1726 0.8415
(0.1635) (0.1376)
상담원1인당사례수 -0.0152 0.9849
(0.0112) (0.0111)
상담원1인당 지역아동수 0.0096 1.0097
(0.0074) (0.0074)
만명당 지역아동센터수 -0.0278 0.9726
(0.0343) (0.0334)
만가구당 수급가구 수 0.0001 1.0001
(0.0006) (0.0006)
범죄지수 -0.0326 0.9679
(0.0794) (0.0768)
중소도시(ref.대도시) 0.2131 1.2375
(0.1891) (0.2340)
농어촌(ref.대도시) 0.3693 1.4467
(0.2645) (0.3827)
재학대 0.3286 1.3890#
(0.1823) (0.2532)
-2 Log Likelihood 4216.98
N 2,509
주: 괄호 안은 군집화에 강건한 표준오차, ref.는 기준범주, 가정외보호기간_1= 1개월 이상-3개월 미만, 가정외보호기간_2= 3개월 이상-6개월 미만, 가정외보호기간_3= 6개월 이상-18개월 미 만, 가정외보호기간_4= 18개월 이상
# p＜0.1, * p＜0.05, ** p＜0.01, *** p＜0.001
Abstract
An Empirical Study of Reunification and Reentry of Maltreated Children in Out-of-Home Placement
in South Korea
Yoon Sookyung Department of Social Welfare The Graduate School Seoul National University
The primary principle in child welfare is to help children grow properly under the protection of their parents. According to this principle, the public child protection system must pursue family reunification under appropriate support and follow-up care for children who are inevitably protected in out-of-home placement due to parental maltreatment. However, among the tasks related to the protection of maltreated children, the support for family reunification of maltreated children in out-of-home placement was very insufficient because it is a relatively less urgent task. This has been pointed out as the weakest part of the child abuse protection system. To suggest policy and practical improvement measures to solve this problem, it is necessary to first understand the family reunification and reentry of maltreated children placed in out-of-home placement comprehensively.
Nevertheless, there is little to no empirical domestic research to support this issue. Therefore, this study aimed to empirically analyze the family reunification and reentry of children in out-of-home placement due to maltreatment.
To this end, there are two research questions, and each question consists
of two sub-research questions. The first research question is, “What is the family reunification of maltreated children in out-of-home placement like?”
The sub-research questions are addressed: (1) “What are the risk and protective factors for family reunification?”; and (2) “How does the probability of family reunification change over time?” The second research question is, “What is the reentry into out-of-home placement after a child has been reunified with their family like?' The sub-research questions are set parallel to the first research question. The sub-research questions are addressed: (1) “What are the risk and protective factors for reentry into out-of-home placement”; and (2) “How does the probability of reentry change over time?”
This study used the national administrative data from the National Child Maltreatment Information System collected by National Child Protection Agency(NCPA) in South Korea. The analytic sample of the first research questions is 7,895 children who were protected outside the home due to parental maltreatment from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017. The analytic sample of the second research question includes 2,879 children who were reunited with their families. The analytic data of this study provides information on the duration of time until the family reunification or until the reentry point and includes right-censored observations. Considering the characteristics of the analytic data and the purpose of the study, a multivariate event history analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazard model and parametric models.
The findings of the first research question are as follows. First, as a result of the analysis of the first sub-research question, family reunification was affected by various risk and protective factors in the ecological system. In terms of family characteristics, the eligibility for national basic livelihood and single-parent families were found to be associated with a lower possibility of family reunification. As for case characteristics, children who experienced sexual abuse, neglect or multiple maltreatment had a lower possibility of
family reunification compared to those who experienced emotional abuse.
Also, children who were frequently maltreated were less likely to have family reunification. As for the characteristic of out-of-home placement, decreased probability of reunification was associated with an increased number of changing placements while children were in out-of-home care. In terms of characteristics of the child protection agency, the higher the number of cases per workers, the lower the possibility of family reunification. The above factors are risk factors that lower the possibility of reunification. On the other hand, characteristics of official support appeared to be the protective factor for family reunification. The longer the case management period for children and parents, the higher the likelihood of family reunification. Also, there was a high possibility of family reunification when parents received case management after the case management was terminated. Children's externalizing problem behaviour, parents' alcohol abuse, and spousal violence were found to be factors that increase the likelihood of family reunion as opposed to the study hypothesis. First, as a result of analysis of the second sub-research question, the results of examining the possibility of family reunification over time are as follows.
The possibility of family reunification was very high until about 8 months after children were protected in out-of-home placement, and this possibility decreased over time. Family reunification does not occur after 20 months and 34% of children in out-of-home placement reunified with their families.
The findings of the second research question are as follows. As a result of analysis of the first sub-research question, reentry was also found to be affected by various protective and risk factors. As a characteristic of the child, there was a high possibility of reentry when children have disabilities or high levels of externalizing problem behaviour. In terms of family characteristics, families supported by national basic livelihood and single-parent families had a higher possibility of reentry. As a case characteristic, the possibility of reentry was higher for children who were
sexually abused than those who were emotionally abused. As for the characteristics of out-of-home placement, the higher the number of changing out-of-home placement while children were in out-of-home care, the higher the probability of reentry. The above factors are risk factors that raise the possibility of reentry. On the other hand, the out-of-home placement period of 6 months to 18 months was identified as a protective factor that lowers the possibility of reentry compared to the short-term out-of-home placement period of fewer than 6 months.
Next, as a result of examining the occurrence of reentry over time, the probability of reentry was high until about 10 months after the family reunification. Reentry does not occur after 23 months and 6.4% of children who reunified with their families reentered.
Based on the above research results, the practical and policy implications of this research are as follows. First, information on risk and protective factors that have been shown to affect family reunification and reentry will provide an empirical basis for developing family reunification evaluation index and family reunification programs. Second, externalizing problem behaviour of children has been found to increase the possibility of both family reunification and reentry. In other words, children with higher levels of externalizing problem behaviour are more likely to reunite with their families, but are more likely to experience reentry; thus, they can be considered as a high-risk group. Based on the above results, for successful family reunification of children with externalizing problem behaviour, proactive efforts to reduce externalizing problem behaviour before and after family reunification are necessary. Providing treatment-oriented foster care services through the specialized foster care system can be one of the alternatives strategies. Third, frequent change in out-of-home placement was found as a high-risk factor that lowers the possibility of family reunification and increases the likelihood of reentry. Considering the above results, it is important to provide a stable out-of-home care service. For example, it is
necessary to install specialized shelter for the maltreated child which can provide medium to long-term protection. Fourth, the higher the number of cases per counsellor, the lower the probability of family reunification. It is necessary to adjust the number of cases per counsellor to an appropriate level so that sufficient case management can be provided for the recovery of out-of-home placement children and families. Fifth, this research found that children with shorter lengths of stay in out-of-home placement were more likely to experience reentry compared to children with sufficient lengths of stay in out-of-home placement. This counterintuitive result implies that it may be important for children and families to have a sufficient period for the recovery of families before the family reunification. Sixth, the critical time point for active family reunification and reentry was found in this study, which will contribute to increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of case management. Seventh, by combining the results of this study, it is possible to infer the timing of successful family reunification with a high probability of family reunification and low possibility of reentry. This so-called golden time of family reunification is within 6 to 8 months after the out-of-home protection. Such information is expected to provide a useful basis for supporting successful family reunification of children who are protected out of home in both aspects of policy and practice. Eighth, most of the children who reentered out-of-home placement after family reunification did not experience recurrence of child maltreatment. The above result suggests that reentry does not only occur due to recurrence of child maltreatment but may be a problem of maladaptation caused by a complex interaction of family dysfunctional factors, such as inappropriate parenting attitudes and child behaviours that have not improved after family reunification. Considering the above results, efforts to strengthen family functions are required to lower the possibility of reentry, and for this, active services of the family unit must be provided.
The theoretical implications of this study are as follows. First of all, there