Considering Parental Resistance and Risk Having completed the resistance-related indicators it is important to make some sense of what it means are the parents likely to engage meaningfully with the plan to manage and – reduce the risk or comply sufficiently to avoid any consequences. A crucial task for the worker, therefore, is to assess the parent’s commitment to engaging and implementing change. Horwath and Morrison (1999) developed a model to provide a framework for assessing parent’s responses to change. GENUINE COMMITMENT TOKENISM Parent recognises the need to change and Parent will agree with the professionals regarding the required changes but will put little effort into makes real efforts to bring about these making change work changes While some changes may occur, they will not have required any effort from the parent. Change occurs despite, not because of, parental actions COMPLIANCE/APPROVAL DISSENT/AVOIDANCE SEEKING Parents will do what is expected of Dissent can range from proactively sabotaging them because they have been told to efforts to bring about change to passively disengaging from the process it” “do The most difficult parents are those who do not Change may occur but has not been admit their lack of commitment to change but internalised because the parents are doing it work subversively to undermine the process (i.e.. without having gone through the process of perpetrators of sexual abuse or fictitious illness) thinking and responding emotionally to the need for change Factors, which may indicate and evidence, disguised compliance should also be taken into consideration and include: No significant change at reviews despite significant Parents/carers agreeing with professionals regarding required changes but put little effort into making changes work Change does occur but as a result of external agencies/resources not the parental/carers efforts
Considering Parental Resistance and Risk Having completed the resistance-related indicators it is important to make some sense of what it means – are the parents likely to engage meaningfully with the plan to manage and reduce the risk or comply sufficiently to avoid any consequences. A crucial task for the worker, therefore, is to assess the parent’s commitment to engaging and implementing change. Horwath and Morrison (1999) developed a model to provide a framework for assessing parent’s responses to change. GENUINE COMMITMENT Parent recognises the need to change and makes real efforts to bring about these changes TOKENISM Parent will agree with the professionals regarding the required changes but will put little effort into making change work While some changes may occur, they will not have required any effort from the parent. Change occurs despite, not because of, parental actions COMPLIANCE/APPROVAL SEEKING Parents will do what is expected of them because they have been told to “do it” Change may occur but has not been internalised because the parents are doing it without having gone through the process of thinking and responding emotionally to the need for change DISSENT/AVOIDANCE Dissent can range from proactively sabotaging efforts to bring about change to passively disengaging from the process The most difficult parents are those who do not admit their lack of commitment to change but work subversively to undermine the process (i.e.. perpetrators of sexual abuse or fictitious illness) Factors, which may indicate and evidence, disguised compliance should also be taken into consideration and include: No significant change at reviews despite significant Parents/carers agreeing with professionals regarding required changes but put little effort into making changes work Change does occur but as a result of external agencies/resources not the parental/carers efforts