论文部分内容阅读
美国家庭和青年事务局推广以证据为基础的使用方法，如FGDM。通常情况下，实践FGDM的时候需要进行调整，以适应文化背景。本文介绍了两个原住民社区和他们使用FGDM的情况。尽管该项目面临很多挑战，例如原住民不太愿意使用FGDM。但作者写道，FGDM可以适用于每个社区。只要我们承认历史因素影响州和原住民部落的关系，社区工作的员工就会更容易接受FGDM。
"Family Group Decision Making （FGDM） with Lakota Families in Two Tribal Communities： Tools to Facilitate FGDM Implementation and Evaluation" Child Welfare， Vol. 91， No. 3 （2012）.
What it’s about： Together， Sicangu Child and Family Services on the Rosebud Reservation， Lakota Oyate Wakanyeja Owicakiyapi on the Pine Ridge Reservation， Casey Family Programs， and the University of Minnesota Duluth adapted the evidence-based Family Group Decision Making model for use in Native American communities. FGDM is centered on a half-day group-decision-making meeting that engages families， as well as other important people in a young person’s life， in a youth's treatment plan. This article outlines the challenges and successes the partners encountered， particularly issues unique to Native communities， such as intergenerational grief and trauma and concerns stemming from past misuse of data gathered from Native American communities.
Why read it： The Family and Youth Services Bureau promotes the use of evidence-based practices such as FGDM. Oftentimes， practices need to be adapted to fit the cultural context in which they are being used. This article describes that process in two Native communities.
Biggest takeaways for family and youth workers： At the two organizations that took part in this study， some staff resisted change and did not buy in to the use of FGDM， preferring other models they were already using. Their resistance may have reflected a tendency to underestimate families' ability to make decisions on their own， without the input of social service professionals， the authors write. Some staff were also confused because some FGDM referrals are voluntary while others are court-mandated. Staff thought mandated sessions clashed with the idea of FGDM as a voluntary forum.
Despite the challenges the project faced， the authors write that FGDM can be adapted by each community to meet its needs. They say that their acknowledging the historical factors that influence state and Tribal relations made staff more likely to accept FGDM. The authors conclude by noting that many tribal stakeholders believe FGDM and other forms of family engagement will lead to fewer child placements in out-of-home care. With proper implementation， the authors say， decisions about the future of a child's life can be made more efficiently and equitably.
（All articles in this FORUM column are contributed by National Clearinghouse on Families & Youth， a service of the Family and Youth Services Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. ）
"Family Group Decision Making （FGDM） with Lakota Families in Two Tribal Communities： Tools to Facilitate FGDM Implementation and Evaluation" Child Welfare， Vol. 91， No. 3 （2012）.
What it’s about： Together， Sicangu Child and Family Services on the Rosebud Reservation， Lakota Oyate Wakanyeja Owicakiyapi on the Pine Ridge Reservation， Casey Family Programs， and the University of Minnesota Duluth adapted the evidence-based Family Group Decision Making model for use in Native American communities. FGDM is centered on a half-day group-decision-making meeting that engages families， as well as other important people in a young person’s life， in a youth's treatment plan. This article outlines the challenges and successes the partners encountered， particularly issues unique to Native communities， such as intergenerational grief and trauma and concerns stemming from past misuse of data gathered from Native American communities.
Why read it： The Family and Youth Services Bureau promotes the use of evidence-based practices such as FGDM. Oftentimes， practices need to be adapted to fit the cultural context in which they are being used. This article describes that process in two Native communities.
Biggest takeaways for family and youth workers： At the two organizations that took part in this study， some staff resisted change and did not buy in to the use of FGDM， preferring other models they were already using. Their resistance may have reflected a tendency to underestimate families' ability to make decisions on their own， without the input of social service professionals， the authors write. Some staff were also confused because some FGDM referrals are voluntary while others are court-mandated. Staff thought mandated sessions clashed with the idea of FGDM as a voluntary forum.
Despite the challenges the project faced， the authors write that FGDM can be adapted by each community to meet its needs. They say that their acknowledging the historical factors that influence state and Tribal relations made staff more likely to accept FGDM. The authors conclude by noting that many tribal stakeholders believe FGDM and other forms of family engagement will lead to fewer child placements in out-of-home care. With proper implementation， the authors say， decisions about the future of a child's life can be made more efficiently and equitably.
（All articles in this FORUM column are contributed by National Clearinghouse on Families & Youth， a service of the Family and Youth Services Bureau of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. ）