Citation

Fitzgerald JR, Bailey C, Litton LJ. Juv. Fam. Court J. 2003; 54(4): 97-107.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2003, National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/j.1755-6988.2003.tb00089.x

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) of 1997 reinforced that the safety, permanency, and well-being of the child should be the primary concerns when making decisions about child protection interventions, child placement, and efforts at reunification. The court's role in oversight of agency practice in individual cases through the requirement of specific judicial findings as a condition of receipt of certain funding was also maintained and strengthened by ASFA. Based on the recognition of the number of cases where there is a co-occurrence of domestic violence and child maltreatment, there is a need for communities and agencies to set reasonable expectations of good practice for responding to the issues raised. As the community sets the expectations of good practice through agency policy, training, and service delivery, the judiciary, through the findings regarding “continuation in the home” or “reasonable efforts” in each individual case, provides the oversight of practice required by ASFA. This article will explore the current applications of reasonable efforts, discuss ways that courts and communities are defining the concept, and examine the need for the development of a reasonable efforts protocol.