Complexity, conflict and uncertainty: Issues in collaboration between child protection and mental health services

This paper provides an analysis of data from a state-wide survey of statutory child protection workers, adult mental health workers, and child mental health workers. Respondents provided details of their experience of collaboration on cases where a parent had mental health problems and there were serious child protection concerns. The survey was conducted as part of a large mixed-method research project on developing best practice at the intersection of child protection and mental health services. Descriptions of 300 cases were provided by 122 respondents. Analyses revealed that a great deal of collaboration occur-red across a wide range of government and community-based agencies; that collaborative processes were often positive and rewarding for workers; and that collaboration was most difficult when the nature of the parental mental illness or the need for child protection intervention was contested. The difficulties experienced included communication, role clarity, competing primary focus, contested parental mental health needs, contested child protection needs, and resources. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Interagency collaboration between child protection and mental health services: Practices, attitudes and barriers

Objective: The aim of this paper is to examine some of the factors that facilitate and hinder interagency collaboration between child protection services and mental health services in cases where there is a parent with a mental illness and there are protection concerns for the child(ren). The paper reports on agency practices, worker attitudes and experiences, and barriers to effective collaboration. Method: A self-administered, cross-sectional survey was developed and distributed via direct mail or via line supervisors to workers in statutory child protection services, adult mental health services, child and youth mental health services, and Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect (SCAN) Teams. There were 232 completed questionnaires returned, with an overall response rate of 21%. Thirty-eight percent of respondents were statutory child protection workers. 39% were adult mental health workers, 16% were child and youth mental health workers, and 4% were SCAN Team medical officers (with 3% missing data). Results: Analysis revealed that workers were engaging in a moderate amount of interagency contact, but that they were unhappy with the support provided by their agency. Principle components analysis and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) on items assessing attitudes toward other workers identified four factors, which differed in rates of endorsement: inadequate training, positive regard for child protection workers, positive regard for mental health workers, and mutual mistrust (from highest to lowest level of endorsement). The same procedure identified the relative endorsement of five factors extracted from items about potential barriers: inadequate resources, confidentiality, gaps in interagency processes, unrealistic expectations, and professional knowledge domains and boundaries. Conclusions: Mental health and child protection professionals believe that collaborative practice is necessary; however, their efforts are hindered by a lack of supportive structures and practices at the organizational level. (c) 2005 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Practice challenges at the intersection of child protection and mental health

This paper examines the complexity of collaboration between child protection and mental health services, where a parent has a mental illness and there are protection concerns for children. The paper reports on data from focused in-depth interviews with 36 child protection workers, adult mental health workers and child and youth mental health workers. Data were analysed thematically, using NVivo to facilitate data management and analysis. Two dimensions were identified. The first, the process of collaboration, relates to four factors that assisted the collaborative process: communication, knowledge, role clarity and resources. The second dimension considers the challenges presented to collaborative work when a parent has a mental illness and a child is in need of protection, and identifies issues that are inherent in cases of this kind. Two types of challenge were identified. The first related to characteristics of mental illness, and included the episodic and/or unpredictable nature of mental illness, incorporating information from psychiatric and parenting capacity assessments, and the provision of ongoing support. The second type of challenge concerned the tension between the conflicting needs of parents and their children, and how this was viewed from both the adult mental health and the child protection perspective. Implications for policy and practice are identified in relation to the need for service models that provide ongoing, flexible support that can be intensified or held back as needed.

PRN Sedation-patterns of prescribing and administration in a child and adolescent mental health inpatient service

Objective: To identify utilisation rates of prn (pro re nata) sedation in children and adolescents receiving inpatient psychiatric treatment, and to compare correlates of prn prescribing and administration. Method A retrospective chart review examined 122 medical charts from a child and youth mental health inpatient service. Results 71.3% of patients were prescribed prn sedation and 50.8% were administered prn sedation. Patients received an average of 8.0 doses of prn sedation, with 9.8% receiving 10 or more doses. Chlorpromazine and diazepam were the most commonly utilised agents. Prescribing of prn sedation was only related to use of regular medications (p < 0.01), and non-parent carers (p < 0.01). In contrast, administration of prn sedation was associated with multiple diagnoses (p < 0.01), pervasive development disorder (p < 0.01), mental retardation (p < 0.01) ADHD (p < 0.01), longer hospital admission (p < 0.01), use of atypical antipsychotics (p < 0.01) and polypharmacy (p < 0.01). Conclusions Despite lack of data to inform practice, prn sedation is widely utilised, especially in complex patients. Future research in this area needs to incorporate nurses and examine whether patients benefit from prn sedation, which drugs and dosing patterns optimise safety and efficacy, and what is the role of prn sedation in the context of other medication.