Safety and Family Group Conferencing
By Jeanette Schmid and Darlene Sykes

A concern regarding safety is often what comes to mind if a child protection worker is told that one plans to bring together the child’s immediate family with relatives and family friends. This anxiety is deepened if there has been any history of violence within the family. Yet, Family Group Conferencing is built on the notion of inclusion and on the idea of widening the circle to ensure that as many voices within the family network as possible are represented and heard. A primary task of the coordinator is therefore to ensure that the conferencing process is physically and emotionally safe for all participants.

Developing safety plans becomes one of the foci of the preparation phase. The coordinator elicits from all prospective participants —both family members and service providers —whether or not they will feel safe enough to be involved in the process. It is the child protection worker’s responsibility to articulate any concerns s/he may have for his/her own or others’ safety during the initial briefing session or during the preparatory phase; the coordinator must also be vigilant about safety issues.

Ultimately it is the family group that will craft the safety plan. This is crucial for two reasons: firstly, service providers are not present during the conference’s family private time, and thus the family members need to be able to maintain a sufficiently predictable and secure environment during that part of the conference; and secondly, the family network will need to be able to function safely post-conference without the ongoing intervention of service providers.

The coordinator utilizes a range of strategies to address safety. The coordinator asks service providers to identify whether they see any threats to family safety or their own safety and checks with the family group to see how safe they believe the process will be for various family members. The coordinator communicates safety concerns raised by any service providers or other family members to the family. Relatives may not assess the risk to be as serious as the service providers. This does not necessarily mean that threats are being minimized, but points to family members knowing each other and the potential for disruption or violence that each brings. For example, the family group may have a different tolerance for loudness or profanity than the child welfare team and often talk about other family gatherings where they have dealt with the same issues successfully. Child protection workers need to trust the coordinator’s and family’s assessment of risk.

Participants may feel safer if a large number of people attend the conference; if a particular person they can rely on to manage emotions is present; or if they are able to bring a support person to enable them to control their feelings and have a say in the process. Some invitees ask for the coordinator to  coach them regarding the manner in which sensitive issues can be raised, while others will caucus ahead of the conference with like-minded family members. In certain situations, it may be appropriate to have certain parties in a close, but separate venue. Sometimes it is necessary to prevent particular individuals from attending the conference, while nevertheless ensuring that they have input into the decision-making (e.g., by letter or teleconference).

At the conference, the safety plan is explicitly reviewed during the early part of the meeting as a means of setting common ground rules. The various support people are identified and their role in the conference is stated. In this way, all the participants know what to expect from each other.

Where violence is part of the concerns identified by service providers as impacting the child’s safety and well being, the family group is required to build a future safety plan into their recommendations. Family Group Conferencing takes a long- rather than a short-term view of safety in the family.

Because of the thorough preparation involved, conferencing processes are typically safe for all participants and have been used successfully in domestic violence or other conflictual scenarios (e.g., custody situations). ^FGC

About the Authors

Jeanette Schmid was the program coordinator at the Toronto Family Group Conferencing Project for six years and is a consultant and a member of the provincial training team.

Darlene Sykes worked as a private contractor for Brant CAS as their FGCM project coordinator for three years, has been the FGCM coordinator for Simcoe CAS for three years. She is also an agency and provincial trainer and mentor. 

Both authors were involved from the early stages of the respective projects.

Previous article: Involving Children in Family Group Conferences

Next article: Keeping the Environment Stable: What to do when Kids Come into Care