MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045896040 · doi:10.1037/h0087009

Review of Parenting Assessments in Child Welfare Cases: A Practical Guide.

2005· article· en· W2045896040 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kathleen Kufeldt

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyWelfareDevelopmental psychologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TERRY D. PEZZOT-PEARCE and JOHN PEARCE Parenting Assessments in Child Welfare cases: A Practical Guide Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 2004, 398 pages (ISBN 0-80208-654-3, CDN$39.95 Paperback; ISBN 0-80208-702-7, CDN$75.00 Cloth) This book sets out to fulfil four major goals that can be summarized as follows: 1) presenting a model for comprehensive parenting assessments; 2) setting out the practical steps to be taken in such assessments; 3) identifying potential errors in carrying out assessments; and 4) providing critical considerations, identified by the authors as practice alerts. These goals are fulfilled in exhaustive fashion, thus providing a comprehensive text for those called upon to make such complex judgments. In fact I would suggest that the book could well be titled a practical and theoretical guide for parenting assessments in child welfare and in consideration of custody and access decision-making. Though there are important differences between the two tasks, the theoretical and experiential background required are the same, as indeed are the processes and practical steps to be taken in conducting assessments. The authors themselves acknowledge that there is a common context. While they indicate that custody and access is not intended as a specific focus of the book, there are references throughout to both scenarios. In addition, it is important to be aware of possible overlaps that may occur, for instance, if an assessor in a custody situation becomes aware of neglect or abuse sufficient to warrant intervention. A refrain throughout the book is the reminder that the central question in parenting assessments is: Can this parent meet the needs of this particular child; Once this is understood then the complexity of the work becomes apparent. The task goes beyond assessing the parent to considering and assessing the child's needs, the relationships and interactions between child, parent, and other caregivers, as well as the broader contextual aspects such as social and community supports, income, occupation, etc. After taking us through preliminary consideration of the common issues involved, the authors use the next five chapters to cover all the factors to be taken into consideration. I appreciated the fact that the two chapters on child factors deal separately with normal or typical child development and specific atypical factors. While coverage of the full range of child development knowledge that any assessor should possess would warrant a text book in itself, it is useful to have the summary information given here. It includes the central and key issue of attachment as well as physical and emotional care and the child's emotional, behavioural, and cognitive development. The chapter on atypical development covers temperament, developmental disorders of various kinds, alcohol- and drug-impacted children, as well as attention and learning problems. The two chapters on parent factors cover personal characteristics and contextual sources of support or stress. Appropriate weight is given to parental history, including experience of being parented themselves, mental health and addictions, presence or absence of abuse or violence in their own experience. There is also discussion of the impact of adolescent parenthood and of the possibility of cognitive limitations. Discussion of parental context includes concrete and practical factors such as income and residence. Social factors concern themselves particularly with whether these are supportive or detrimental to good parenting. Relationships with family and friends as well as partner are covered. A particularly useful and relevant contribution to the literature is the coverage of religion, cultural background, and identity as well as considerations related to homosexuality. Before launching into the assessment itself, the authors present one other chapter that has considerable practical value for anyone in this field of practice, and particularly for beginners. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.018

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.370 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienneSame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207