"Family plan" and "Family group conferencing" in child welfare: A cross-cultural comparison

The purpose of this study was to make a cross-cultural comparison of the child protection philosophy and services in the USA and Turkey, examine the "Family Plan" and "Family Group Conferencing" models in the US child welfare, and develop 'family plan' and 'family group conferencing' models in accordance with Turkish culture. Additionally, within the scope of the research, the history of child protection in the US and Turkey; structural and legal inherent problems in the US child welfare; psychological counseling services and child welfare interaction; the uses of 'strengths-based approach' and 'father engagement' in "family plan" development have been examined and discussed, some briefly, some in details. The qualitative study was carried out with document analysis. Some major findings are that child welfare in Turkey employs more proactive and primary preventive applications and implements more advanced policies in preparing the child under protection for adult life than the US child welfare agencies. On the other hand, both 'counseling services or therapy in child welfare' and 'child welfare research and studies' in academia are very rooted and widespread in the US to the extent that "child welfare therapy" has been a long-standing specialization. Developing "Family Plan" and "Family Group Conferencing" models in accordance with Turkish culture not only is possible but also necessary. When a family, for any reason, wants to give its child to the protection agency, it is foreseen that a "family plan" developed in a "family group conference" may prevent the transfer. In terms of the research implications: In Turkey, in-home children supported by SED (Social & Economic Support) should be considered within the scope of child protection, reflected in the statistics of "x per thousand". It is suggested to study what other areas could benefit from the "Family Plan" and "Family Group Conferencing" models in Turkey and how to put them into practice. A highlight recommendation for the US child welfare is that legislative and financial arrangements should be made as soon as possible to help child protective agencies move to proactive and primary-level preventive applications.