Alcohol and drug counselors treating clients who are involved
with the child protective services (CPS) system should be aware
of a number of emerging trends. These include limits on the
length of time clients can remain on public assistance and increased
demands on clients receiving aid, reforms enacted to the child
welfare system that require CPS agencies to place far greater
emphasis on children's health and safety and on permanent placement
of children versus maintenance of parental rights, and constraints
imposed upon substance abuse treatment by managed care.
Continuing trends also challenge providers to adapt new treatment
regimes, acquire new skills, and advocate for client needs.
While drug courts continue to provide mandated treatment for
some substance abusers, a countertrend toward punishing substance
abusers--especially pregnant mothers who have been prosecuted
under abuse or neglect statutes--is evident in many State legal
systems. The ever-changing demographics of drug use present
new challenges, as an aging cohort of substance abusers are now
parents to older children who are themselves at risk for substance
abuse disorders. Increasingly detected through improved screening,
clients with multiple diagnoses present complex needs that can
be met only through collaboration and lobbying of managed care
officials about the need for more complex treatment. At the
same time, counselors continue to face requirements for professional
education that require considerable expenditures of both time
and money.
In 1996, Congress enacted a major overhaul of welfare called
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation
Act. It transformed the Aid to Families with Dependent Children
(AFDC) program, which entitled qualified individuals with dependent
children to assistance, into Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF), a program offering limited relief. Unlike AFDC, TANF
imposes work requirements on aid recipients, limits the amount
of time adults can receive benefits, and bars benefits to certain
categories of persons, such as individuals with felony drug convictions.
TANF will undoubtedly have a major impact on parents in treatment.
Refer to the forthcoming TIP, Integrating Substance Abuse
Treatment and Vocational Services (CSAT, in press [a]), for
an expanded discussion of welfare reform and substance abuse
treatment.
In addition to TANF, Congress has established a series of
programs and funding streams that are designed to
Extend services to troubled families to
help them to remain intact or to reunite (i.e., family support
and preservation services)
Provide Federal payments to support foster care when children
must be placed outside the home
Expedite permanent placement for children who cannot be reunited
with their families
Provide assistance to increase the number of adoptions of
children in foster care
To qualify for funding, State child welfare programs must
implement specific timetables and goals designed to expedite
the return of children placed in foster care to their families
or free them for adoption.
The requirements and limitations Federal law places on States
receiving Federal funding for child welfare and child protective
services may have a profound impact on parents in treatment.
Depending on how each State implements the law, the following
examples illustrate how parents in treatment may be affected:
States may be less tolerant of children
living with substance-abusing parents. As States implement
the requirement that the child's health and safety be the paramount
concern, they may take a less tolerant view when children are
living in households with one or more adults who abuse substances.
Parents will have less time to comply with CPS agency
mandates. As the 15-month time limit on maintaining the
child in foster care goes into effect and States enforce requirements
regarding prompt determinations about children's permanent placement,
parents who cannot achieve sobriety after a year of treatment
or otherwise comply with CPS agency mandates may be at greater
risk of losing their parental rights. They may also lose the
funding supporting their treatment.
Parents with previous CPS agency involvement may lose
parental rights quickly. Clients in treatment who have previously
lost parental rights to another child may receive an expedited
proceeding that denies them family preservation services and
their rights to children currently in their care.
The Federal government has established a series of programs
to fund and support States' efforts to help children and their
families in crisis. These programs include Family Support and
Family Preservation Services to strengthen family stability and
facilitate the safe reunification of a child who has been removed
from the home and Foster Care and Adoption Promotion and Support
Services that support both the maintenance of foster care and
encourage more adoptions out of the foster care system.
These programs provide funding to States, but they also require
States to adopt a number of important policies, timetables, and
restrictions, including a significant emphasis on children's
health and safety, permanent placement, prompt development, and
frequent review of service plans; time limits on family reunification
services; and speedier termination of parental rights. In effect,
the 1997 amendments to the Family Preservation and Support Services
Act changed the emphasis from family preservation to child health
and safety. This means that ensuring the child's developmental
stability now takes precedence over extending "reasonable efforts"
to reunify the family. For a more detailed explanation of this
law and recent welfare reform laws, see Appendix
C.
Parents whose public assistance is reduced or terminated (e.g.,
because of changes in welfare law) may have difficulty providing
their children with basic levels of food, clothing, shelter,
and medical care. Will they find themselves charged with child
neglect or abuse as a result? Most States prohibit a finding
of child abuse or neglect if parents fail to provide the necessities
of life because of poverty; however, it is not clear what will
happen if their inability to provide is due to their failure
to comply, for example, with welfare-to-work requirements. Treatment
clients who lose public assistance may also lose their eligibility
for Medicaid, which in some States pays for treatment.
The child welfare system provides Medicaid benefits for all
children in its care. Some States also provide Medicaid benefits
for children living at home but in open CPS cases. In many States,
however, parents are not eligible for Medicaid. Advocacy for
entitling Medicaid benefits to those parents who are involved
in the CPS system would benefit such parents who are seeking,
or seeking to complete, treatment.
The combined effect of new welfare reform requirements and
changes in child welfare laws may place great pressure on parents
involved with CPS agencies. To avoid losing their children,
parents may be required to enter treatment, achieve sobriety,
or meet other expectations from the CPS agency, all within a
limited time period. Similarly, under TANF, welfare authorities
may impose work requirements and sanction those who fail to comply.
Those with substance abuse disorders, minimal work experience,
and a lack of parenting skills can feel overwhelmed by these
growing demands. Staying sober, by itself, is a difficult achievement
for many. If they have to comply with work requirements and
assume new parenting responsibilities, they may see all of this
as impossible. For some, the response will be denial of the
reality that the system has changed. Others may be overcome
by hopelessness and be inclined to give up. Other parents will
relapse. With the States placing greater emphasis on children's
health and safety and permanent placement, any one of these responses
could mean loss of parental rights. Moreover, States that choose
to test welfare recipients for drug abuse may quickly detect
a relapse, which could result in the reduction or elimination
of benefits. Or a child welfare agency might conclude that a
relapse means that reasonable efforts to preserve or reunite
the family are no longer consistent with the goal of a safe and
stable environment for the child.
As welfare reform and changes in child protection laws are
implemented, counselors will see increasingly stressed parents
in need of supportive counseling and a web of other services.
In these changed times, however, support will not suffice.
If the parent in treatment is to emerge with her family intact,
the counselor must combine support with a firmness rooted in
the understanding that the rules in this area have changed and
become less forgiving. The continuing challenge for counselors
in the years ahead will be to provide support to clients while
conveying to them the urgency of attaining or maintaining sobriety.
More persons entering treatment are paying for their services
through managed care systems that place limitations on the type
and amount of treatment provided. Medicaid, Medicare, and welfare
benefits, once provided through private insurance, are all being
allocated to managed care. Accountants and other nonhealth professionals
who may have limited health care background often are making
treatment decisions. Typically, clients are receiving authorizations
for fewer sessions at less intensity. A client who required
safe detoxification once was funded for 21 days; now, limited
funding allows for only 2 days. In the late 1970s, a pregnant
substance-dependent mother could stay in the hospital for 5 days.
Now, she is discharged almost immediately after giving birth.
The amount of time most agencies must spend on the telephone
with managed care representatives is staggering. Services a
doctor or counselor believes are medically necessary are frequently
denied (Rabasca, 1998). Programs once
referred clients freely to appropriate services; now, additional
services with lengthy justifications must be preapproved. Rather
than taking into account the individual's circumstances, insurance
representatives use reference manuals, such as the American Society
of Addiction Medicine's (ASAM) Patient Placement Criteria
for the Treatment of Substance-Related Disorders, 2nd edition
(ASAM, 1996) or the Green Spring Health
Services Medical Necessity Criteria for Utilization Management(Nyman et al., 1992), to determine
the appropriate level of care.
Clients with childhood abuse and neglect issues as well as
a substance abuse disorder may face managed care restrictions
on the number of visits they can make to mental health services.
Managed care often will not pay for sexual abuse or physical
abuse assessments and evaluations if the State is involved, often
looking to the State to provide them; this complicates access
to services. These restrictions may mean that both problems
cannot be adequately addressed, particularly given the fact that
abuse issues often do not surface until late in treatment, when
the allotted number of visits may be nearly exhausted. Often
by the time additional visits are approved, the continuity of
therapy needed for the best chance of success may have been lost.
Managed care may also deny treatment to clients with childhood
abuse and neglect issues because they are not sufficiently motivated
to deal with these problems.
In several surveys of members of the American Psychological
Association (APA), respondents reported that managed care created
ethical dilemmas in which they were required to report confidential
patient information as a condition of reimbursement (Clay,
1998). Clearly, such dilemmas are of particular concern
in cases of substance abuse disorder because they may also involve
issues of child abuse and neglect. (See TIP 24, A Guide to
Substance Abuse Services for Primary Care Clinicians [CSAT, 1997a], for more information on the
legal and ethical issues involved in sharing information with
insurers and other third-party payors.)
The strong backlash against such policies has recently resulted
in legal actions at both State and Federal levels. Legislation
is also under consideration at the State and Federal levels to
increase accountability for the health outcomes of managed care
agencies. In 1996, five States passed laws protecting consumers
from managed care abuses; in 1997, 17 more States took such actions
(Clay, 1998).
Implications for providers include the following:
Know how to "work the system" and speak
the language of managed care. Some counseling agencies hire
an individual specifically to perform this task. It is especially
important to know a company's stated placement criteria. In
cases of current child abuse, counselors should be aware that
when a CPS agency is involved, the capitation rate might be higher
because it is expected that more services will be used. Because
the managed care company is allocating more money per client,
there should be a greater capacity to support substance abuse
treatment that will benefit the entire family.
Consider innovative strategies. In Florida, for example,
five major substance abuse treatment programs combined and created
their own managed care company so that they could compete with
other managed care companies.
Develop the capacity for different modalities of treatment. For example, a managed care caseworker refuses to authorize
residential treatment for a person who has a history of substance
dependency, is currently using, and has no motivation for treatment.
The counselor as provider may set up smaller goals to work within
the system, proceeding with low intensity motivational counseling
once or twice a week. At the end of the authorized treatment
period, the counselor may be able to report increased motivation
and succeed in having a higher level of care authorized.
Have proof that the treatment program or agency is successful
and ultimately saves money. A treatment program can demonstrate
its contributions by maintaining data on quality assurance and
program evaluations that the program manager can use when he
works with the managed care administrator. Counselors should
also be prepared to provide factual data to demonstrate problems
that have arisen from system constraints.
Although counselors and treatment program administrators often
focus on the negative impact of managed care, this trend can
benefit clients by providing incentives for developing interagency
collaborations and satellite clinics in different settings.
In the not too distant past, few counseling programs would have
been enthusiastic about locating a treatment program within a
primary care clinic or a satellite child guidance clinic within
a methadone maintenance treatment program. Today, although these
ideas are still novel, they are by no means unthinkable. Since
no one agency is likely to be able to meet all the needs of a
family affected by substance abuse, particularly one in which
child abuse or neglect has occurred, closer collaboration among
services may result in more effective, family-oriented approaches
to intervention.
As legislators address managed care issues, counselors can
be effective advocates, working to ensure that the care their
clients need is available. By working proactively with others
to raise systemic issues, counselors can ensure their concerns
are represented in the legislative process. Vocal, clear, factual
communication can help hold State and managed care agencies accountable
for the results of their policies. (For more information on
managed care, see TIP 27, Comprehensive Case Management for
Substance Abuse Treatment [CSAT, 1998a].)
Increasingly, funders are holding CPS agencies, health care
services, and substance abuse treatment programs accountable
for demonstrating specific outcomes. Programs must be prepared
to demonstrate their effectiveness using objectively verifiable
outcome measures. Failure to meet established goals may result
in a loss of funding or in mandated systemic changes. The individual
counselor may be asked to provide both qualitative and quantitative
data (such as case histories) to demonstrate the quality of care
she is giving. Such evaluations can be expensive.
Clients who are in treatment counseling and also receiving
services from other agencies (which is often true of those involved
in allegations of child abuse and neglect) may be assessed repeatedly
through interviews and questionnaires. The counselor can help
prepare clients for this invasive mandated reporting by emphasizing
its potential benefits. Although time consuming to collect,
such data provide a valuable opportunity to streamline programs
and improve services.
Class action suits have been filed in Federal courts against
child welfare agencies in several States, resulting in many of
them being placed under some form of Federal supervision.
The mechanisms in place to hold the agencies accountable could
affect substance abuse counselors in these States, who may receive
increased requests for case and outcome data from agencies that
must report to the court. A counseling agency that has a contract
with a CPS agency should be prepared to demonstrate that the
services provided are likely to affect the outcome positively
or risk losing funding.
Concerning accountability, some jurisdictions are moving to
open family court hearings. (The Adoption and Safe Families
Act now requires that foster parents be notified of all hearings
and be given the opportunity to testify.) Clients will be affected
because their cases, along with their substance abuse, are being
made public. CPS agencies will be held more accountable because
their work will be open to public scrutiny.
From the Federal to the community level, changes are being
made that influence the way substance abuse treatment agencies
deliver services.
Increasingly, agencies must communicate and collaborate to meet
a client's needs under the constraints posed by funding limitations,
applicable laws, and managed care policies.
Some counseling agencies have merged with other service agencies
in order to deal with administrative burdens such as reporting
requirements and the need to work intensively with managed care
representatives.
Many Federal grants require public-private partnerships and multidisciplinary
treatment strategies formalized through memoranda of understanding.
As agencies become more accustomed to working together, their
attitudes toward collaboration also are changing.
Agencies increasingly cross borders that were once sacrosanct.
Practitioners are more aware that research and experience have
demonstrated the importance of a wide range of support services
(such as transportation, housing, and day care) for increasing
the effectiveness of counseling (Feig, 1998).
As a consequence, the role of the treatment provider is changing
from one who works in relative isolation to one who is a partner
within an integrated system.
Many traditional treatment agencies are expanding their practice
to incorporate mental health services.
By doing so, they make treatment more accessible for clients
with coexisting disorders.
For example, an adult survivor who has mental health issues and
is also a substance abuser may receive treatment for both needs
at the same location.
Such close partnerships provide a more cohesive approach to meeting
clients' needs.
In addition, this approach may provide a more solid funding base
for agency services.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is committed
to leading efforts to improve collaborative working relationships
between the child welfare and substance abuse treatment fields
and to supporting States' efforts to do the same.
The Department's recent report to Congress, Blending Perspectives
and Building Common Ground, describes several programs that
can assist States and local communities in expanding substance
abuse treatment for clients in the child welfare system, including
the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grants, the
Targeted Capacity Expansion Program, and Medicaid (DHHS,
1999).
An innovative program in Connecticut by the Department of
Children and Families (DCF) called Project SAFE (Substance Abuse
Family Evaluation) directly links CPS agencies with substance
abuse treatment (see Chapter 5). The
experience over the past 3 years has led to more than 20,000
unduplicated referrals from CPS agencies to a statewide network
of substance abuse treatment providers. Project SAFE provides
priority access to substance abuse evaluations, drug testing,
and various outpatient substance abuse services to clients identified
by the CPS agency. Referrals are coordinated from the beginning
through a statewide network that also coordinates other payment
responsibilities. The Project has led to communication and a
definition of roles and response guidelines between CPS agencies
and the substance abuse treatment system.
Connecticut's DCF recently created Supportive Housing for
Recovering Families, which will provide drug-free housing assistance
and case management for families who are reunifying and making
a transition to the community after successful residential substance
abuse treatment. DCF is working on outreach approaches once
the CPS agency and Project SAFE identify a client as needing
substance abuse treatment. DCF is also collaborating with the
academic community to pilot motivational enhancement training
and approaches to both the CPS and substance abuse treatment
system as well as case management services.
In the current environment, traditional funding sources are
drying up, and many traditional programs are going out of business.
Moreover, many Federal grants and contracts are now aimed at
collaborative efforts. Once there were many funding streams;
now there are only a few State-subsidized funding sources. Persistent,
creative fundraising is essential, and success almost always
depends on proactive strategies to form collaborations. Agencies
must clearly define their responsibilities and nurse the relationships
they will need to seek funding in innovative partnerships. Program
funding may come from drug courts or from CPS agencies, which
now have the flexibility to use a portion of their funding to
support substance abuse treatment (see Figure
7-1).
Over the past 20 years, the number of people over 35 years
of age using illicit substances has increased significantly (
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration [SAMHSA], 1996). The 1995 National Household
Survey on Drug Abuse indicates there is a large cohort of
aging substance-abusing parents:
In general, the aging of people in the heavy drug-using
cohorts of the late 1970s, many of whom continue to use illicit
drugs, has diminished any observable reductions in use among
the 35+ age group and has resulted in an overall shift in the
age composition of drug users... For example, in 1985, 19 percent
of cocaine-related episodes involved persons age 35 or older.
By 1995, this percentage had increased to 42 percent (SAMHSA,
1996).
Epidemiological surveys indicate that actual substance dependence
occurs most frequently during early to middle adulthood, when
a substantial proportion of the general population is parenting
minor children (Anthony et al., 1994).
Consequently, treatment providers should continue to expect
to find many parents of minor children in their caseload, with
the attendant possibility of substance-related child abuse or
neglect.
Some research now suggests that gender differences are an
important factor in addiction and recovery (Magura
and Laudet, 1996). When counseling clients whose families
are affected not only by substance abuse but also by child abuse
and neglect, research suggests that counselors can best meet
the clients' needs by taking these gender-specific factors into
account (Coletti et al., 1997).
Women who are pregnant or parenting need "family-oriented
services providing comprehensive care as well as parenting and
family skills training, all of which usually remain unaddressed
in traditional drug treatment" (Magura and
Laudet, 1996, p. 203). In the opinion of many researchers,
the absence of such specialized interventions may well result
in an increased incidence of child abuse and neglect, as well
as increased out-of-home placement (Magura
and Laudet, 1996). Programs that meet such needs can help
engage pregnant and parenting women and improve treatment for
them, but such services are still not widely available (see
Chapter 6).
Men's roles as fathers also should not be ignored in providing
substance abuse treatment. It is true that among clients who
are parents, women are more likely to have children in their
care and men more likely to be estranged from their children.
But surveys of representative samples indicate that in the general
population far more fathers than mothers have substance abuse
disorders (DHHS, 1994) and men consistently
outnumber women in all types of treatment (Gerstein
et al., 1997). Consequently, though it is true that a greater
proportion of women entering treatment are mothers and
are more likely to have minor children in their care, the numbers of men and women seeking help who are parents are about
the same (DHHS, 1999).
Changes in welfare laws now require a mother receiving welfare
to identify the father of her children. Consequently, fathers
who seemed nearly irrelevant in the recent past have regained
visibility. Legal changes in welfare laws also allow fathers
to be present in the home without the loss of financial support.
Historically, in an abuse or neglect situation, CPS agencies
have worked to keep the mother and children together but assumed
that an abusing father should leave the family; this view, however,
appears to be changing. Fathers are increasingly recognized
and supported, with resulting benefits for children. Courts
are discovering the value of paternal relatives as placement
options for children. As substance abuse among women rises and
women continue to be disproportionately affected by the AIDS
epidemic, fathers in treatment may become viable placement options
for children whose mothers cannot care for them.
Fathers are increasingly motivated to assume a greater share
of parenting responsibilities. Over the past 20 years, a number
of social forces have converged to create new definitions of
fatherhood. If these trends continue, more men who enter treatment
may see parenting as part of their identity as men, and more
of them may be distressed about their inability to function effectively
as fathers because of substance abuse. Paternal substance abuse
(most commonly paternal alcoholism) has been associated with
spousal abuse, parental neglect, and failure to provide financial
support (Chassin et al., 1996; Dion
et al., 1997; Dukma and Roosa, 1995;
Egami et al., 1996; Ichiyama
et al., 1996). Because many fathers today show an increased
willingness to work toward change for the benefit of their children,
the treatment provider would be well advised to use this information
to help motivate male clients.
More practitioners in other settings are now actively concerned
with the client as father and are conducting research to define
associated issues and needs.
On a limited basis, some substance
abuse researchers are engaged in developing interventions to
build parenting skills that are offered to both men and women
(Luthar and Walsh, 1995). Prisons sometimes
offer courses in parenting to male inmates. Specialized interventions
have also been designed for teenage fathers, fathers with newborn
infants, newly divorced fathers, and fathers with families on
welfare. However, gender-specific interventions targeting the
specific needs and concerns of fathers with substance abuse disorders
still need to be developed and tested.