Yuri Sonoi
[Abstract]
Recruiting and retaining foster parents are two major issues in the study of foster care. The recruiting of foster parents deals with the problem of foster home shortages, whereas the retaining of foster parents deals with the problem of how foster parents can continue their fostering activities. In this study, I focus on retention, using the theory of roles, to examine how foster parents can be encouraged to continue fostering.
According to the theory of roles, the process by which people learn about their roles includes three stages: role expectation, role performance, and role-taking. Role expectation refers to the process by which society expects individuals to adopt certain behaviors associated with their social positions. Role performance is the actual behavior of individuals that conforms to those role expectations or norms. Finally, role-taking is the process by which individuals learn more fully about the expected behaviors associated with their roles through receiving positive and/or negative sanctions from significant others about their role performances.
The study involved qualitative interviews of 75 licensed foster parents in 51 Japanese families from 2008 to 2010. The interviewees had no biological or adoptive relationship with their foster children. The results showed that foster parents can maintain their caring activities by learning about their fostering roles in the course of receiving acknowledgment and recognition from significant others for their role performances.
Keywords
foster parents, role-taking, retention of foster parents
Background
The goal of the present study is to examine how foster parents can continue fostering by drawing on the theory of roles. The study suggests that foster parents can maintain their commitment to fostering activities through learning about their foster care roles and through receiving acknowledgment, appreciation, regard, and recognition from significant others, such as caseworkers at child welfare agencies and teachers of foster children, whose perspectives are considered very important by foster parents (MacGregor et al. 2006: 354; Denby et al. 1999: 287).
In recent years, child abuse by birth parents has become a serious problem in Japan. One suitable, practical measure in response to this problem is to provide foster families for abused or neglected children who cannot live with their birth parents. However, in actuality, approximately 90 percent of abused Japanese children are cared for in residential facilities, institutions, or group homes, whereas only 10 percent have foster families. This undesirable situation arises largely from the shortage of foster parents in Japan. From the viewpoint of these childrenʼs socialization needs, institutional or residential care cannot overcome some limitations or possible deficiencies inherent in these forms of care when compared with the foster family system. I use the term to define the process by which children are taught to behave in a way that is acceptable in their society, and to acquire the knowledge, skills, social norms, and values that enable them to live in such a way. Research studies in the U.S. have demonstrated various problems in the development of children who have been reared in institutional care, such as language retardation, impairment of motor functions, and limited emotional responses toward other people and objects (Yarrow 1964; Reiss 1965).
One problem with institutional care lies in the daily shift changes between staff. The frequent changes of caregivers, compounded by high staff turnover, result in inadequate continuity of care, which can be detrimental to the childrenʼs socialization process, emotional stability, and intellectual development. These frequent changes of caregivers are often attributed to the bureaucracy system existing in the country, but until this situation is improved children will face difficulties in finding a lifelong reliable person (Yarrow 1964; Reiss 1965; Holland et al. 2005).
On the other hand, research has shown noticeable improvement
with regard to conduct disorder, hyperactivity, and emotional disorder among children who were placed under the prolonged care of foster parents (Barber and Delfabbro 2005; Wilson and Conroy 1999). My interviews with 75 foster parents who had raised their foster children until they came of age revealed an interesting pattern: the foster children, as they grew up, married, and started their own families, took adequate care of their children and were attentive toward their childrenʼs socialization.
Research in the U.S., as well as my own research, has shown that an appropriate socialization of neglected children is easier in the context of family foster care, which also increases the likelihood that this socialization will be passed on to the next generation (Sonoi 2013). As a result, providing foster families is an essential measure to assist children in the human-services system who need care, both in Japan and in the U.
S.
There are two ways to address the shortage of foster homes: recruit new foster parents and retain current foster parents. These, in fact, are two major themes in the study of foster care (Andersson 2001; Baum et al. 2001; Colton et al. 2008; Hudson and Levasseur 2002; Kirton 2001;
Rhodes et al. 2001, 2003a; Triseliotis et al. 1998). Research on recruiting new foster parents mainly examines individualsʼ motivations for becoming a foster parent (Andersson 2001; Baum et al. 2001; Buehler et al. 2003; Colton et al. 2008; Gillis-Arnold et al. 1998; Kirton 2001;
MacGregor et al. 2006). Meanwhile, research on retaining current foster parents is concerned primarily with the operation of effective social supports and services that help foster parents to continue fostering (Buehler et al. 2003; Colton et al. 2008; Denby et al. 1999; MacGregor et al.
2006; Rhodes et al. 2001, 2003a; Triseliotis et al. 1998). These supports include adequate training in caring for foster children, timely crisis intervention by professional child welfare workers, adequate compensation, and respite services that provide temporary relief, permitting foster parents to become rejuvenated from the stress of fostering (MacGregor 2006: 354).
Although recruitment and retention of foster parents are the two main ways to ensure a supply of foster families, previous studies have pointed out that recruitment is a costly, time-consuming activity and that retaining qualified foster parents increases the chances that children will be placed with skilled, experienced families (Rhodes 2001:
85). Other studies have suggested that recruitment efforts alone are not
sufficient and that there is a greater need to support to parents after they have begun the fostering task (Denby et al. 1999: 287).
Thus, existing research on foster care tends to regard the retention of foster parents as a more effective way of ensuring an adequate supply of family foster homes than relying on recruitment of new foster parents.
Numerous studies on the retention of foster parents have shown that sufficient supports for foster parents are related to better retention rates (Chamberlain et al. 1992; Denby et al. 1999; MacGregor et al. 2006;
Rhodes et al. 2001, 2003a).
However, foster parents can become discouraged and lose interest in maintaining their caring role, even if comprehensive support services are available. This may be especially true of foster parents caring for difficult foster children (Rhodes et al. 2003a: 146).
On the other hand, when foster parents receive encouragement from child welfare workers about their efforts to deal with the challenges of raising difficult foster children, they are more likely to be satisfied with their fostering roles (Rhodes et al. 2003a: 146; Denby et al.
1999; Fees et al. 1998; Sanchirico et al. 1998). Other studies have indicated that when foster parents have a sense of being valued, acknowledged, recognized, and respected by child welfare workers, they are more likely to continue their fostering activities (Hudson and Levasseur, 2002: 861;
MacGregor et al. 2006: 354).
The theory of roles can help elucidate the process of how foster parents maintain their fostering activities. Prior research applying the theory of roles as a framework for understanding foster parenthood has examined how foster parents and foster care workers perceive foster parentsʼ roles. Rhodes et al. (2003b) found a lack of agreement in perceptions of foster parentsʼ roles between foster parents and foster care workers.
However, minimal research has investigated the process of role- taking in which foster parents learn about the roles of foster parents through acknowledgment and recognition from significant others, such as caseworkers and schoolteachers of foster children, and thus improve their own role performance. By drawing on the theory of roles, I seek to explain how foster parents can be encouraged to continue fostering by learning about their fostering roles in the process of role-taking.
Research on the retention of foster parents can be divided broadly into two categories. Studies of the process of role-taking among foster parents can be viewed as the internal aspect of research on foster parent
retention, while studies of supports for foster parents can be seen as the external aspect of retention. I use the term “internal aspect” to describe foster parentsʼ own behaviors in fostering roles, whereas “external aspect” is used to describe the outside services and supports offered to foster parents. This study explores the internal aspect of retention, to which previous studies have given little consideration.
Theoretical Framework
Using a qualitative methodology, I examine the behaviors of foster parents in their fostering roles. The theory of roles is applied to provide a basis for explaining how foster parents continue their fostering activities. According to the theory, the process by which people learn about their roles includes three stages: role expectation, role performance, and role-taking.
Mead (1934) was the first to systematically use the concept of roles in describing the interaction process. In this process, our behavior toward others impacts their behavior toward us, which conversely influences and determines our future actions and communication. In this conception, roles are viewed as the outcome of a process of interaction.
That is, in the interaction process every role involves interaction with other roles. Individuals in particular roles are always testing their conception of their roles with others, whose responses reinforce or call into question these conceptions. This experience in turn leads individuals to maintain or change their own role behavior (Mead 1934: 161;
Abercrombie 2006: 333).
Mead explains the concept of roles in the interaction process through an analysis of how people take the role of others. In taking the role of others, an individual develops his or her own self in relation to other individuals within the process of social experience in which these persons are involved (Mead 1934: 135, 138). Individuals monitor their own behavior by taking the role of others in order to be able to adopt appropriate attitudes toward the society to which they belong (Mead 1934: 151; Banton 1965: 25; Abercrombie 2006: 338).
Individuals can take the role of others in two ways: they can take
the role of or of the . Significant others
are particular persons who have a significant effect on an individual;
“generalized other” refers to the organized community or social group that gives the individual his or her sense of self. The attitude of the
generalized other represents the attitude of the whole community. Mead insists that individuals must take the attitude of the generalized other toward themselves in order to fully develop and build up their own selves (Mead 1934: 154-155, 160).
Of these two ways, I focus here on taking the role of significant others. Mead explains that children learn about society and develop their own personalitytheir selfby taking the role of significant others, such as mothers, teachers, or police officers whose roles children imaginatively and deliberately assume when at play (Mead 1934: 150-153).
When a child assumes a role in play, he or she has in mind a set of stimuli that call out the sort of responses that they call out in the relevant significant others (Mead 1934: 150-151).
In the fostering context, the significant others for foster parents might include the foster childʼs caseworkers, schoolteachers, school principals, and so on. When foster parents assume fostering roles, they also have a set of stimuli that call out in themselves the types of responses that they call out in the significant others. This interaction might lead foster parents to maintain or refine their own role behavior, since they learn more about their fostering roles through the responses received from the significant others. These responses from significant others can take the form of positive sanctions, such as acknowledgment, appreciation, and recognition expressed toward foster parents who behave in ways that reflect the attitudes of the significant others. In this way, foster parents learn to behave appropriately in their roles through the feedback received from others who are important to them (Morioka and Mochizuki 1997: 94).
Banton (1965: 29) adds to Meadʼs interpretation by defining a role as a set of norms and expectations associated with a social position. Hill points out that the concept of role is a bridging concept that links individuals and their society. Roles are expected by a society, but are learned, taken, and enacted by individuals (Hill 1966:13). That is, individuals perform and take their own role, but they do so in conformity with expectations communicated to them by society.
Morioka and Mochizuki define a role as a learned behavior as well as an expected behavior. First, individuals learn about the broad outline of the role associated with their social positions from the viewpoint of social norms. Second, in the process of performing their roles they learn more about the details of those roles through positive and/or negative sanctions from significant others regarding their role performances
(Morioka and Mochizuki 1997: 94).
Based on my review of theoretical studies, I identify role expectation, role performance and role-taking as follows. Role expectation is the process in which a society expects people to exhibit certain behaviors associated with their social positions. Role performance is peopleʼs actual behavior that conforms to social norms.
Since norms are expectations about appropriate conduct, role performance is conceived as the fulfillment of role expectations. Finally, role-taking is the process by which people learn about their own role behavior through receiving positive and/or negative sanctions from significant others regarding their role performances.
Methods
I conducted semi-structured interviews with 75 licensed foster parents46 foster mothers (44 married, 2 single) and 29 foster fathers (28 married, 1 single)in 51 family foster care homes in which the foster parents and foster child were not related to each other. I conducted these interviews over a 24-month period from 2008 to 2010 in eight geographic areas of Japan: three government-designated cities (Sapporo, Kitakyushu, and Fukuoka) and five prefectures in the Kyushu-Okinawa region (Fukuoka, Saga, Nagasaki, Oita, and Okinawa).
The foster parents whom I interviewed were all licensed and were members of the local Foster Parentsʼ Association. I was introduced to the foster parentsinterview respondentswho agreed to cooperate with my research by the Foster Parent Associations in each survey area.
Interviews were conducted in private in the intervieweeʼs home or in a reserved room in the office of the Foster Parent Association to which they belonged. Interviews were conducted with one or both foster parents.
In research on retention of foster parents, six months is regarded as the minimum length of time after which foster parents can be considered as continuing in their role (Rhodes et al. 2003a: 140). Since all foster parents in this study had been fostering for more than six months, they can be considered “continuing” foster parents.1Among the 51 foster families, 24 (47.1%) had been fostering for more than seven years, 13
1 The length of time as a foster parent was calculated as the number of years from when each interviewee received a fostering license to the year of the interview.
(25.5%) for five to seven years, and 14 (27.5%) for one to five years.
Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the foster parents in this study (Sonoi 2013: 134). By way of comparison, Table 1 also presents results of a Japanese national survey by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (2009, hereafter the MHLW survey) and an existing study of foster families by Yuzawa (2004). The demographic characteristics of the foster parents in this study are quite similar to those in the other two studies.
In all three studies, foster parents were generally around their fifties in all these studies. In terms of occupation, although the single most common answer was “retired” with 20.9%, 79.1% of foster fathers in this study engaged in some type of paid work, including professional jobs (18.6%), clerical work (16.3%), clergy (11.6%), and others. Although most foster mothers in this study were full-time housewives, approximately one-third of them had paid employment. As noted above, about one-half of foster parents had been fostering for more than seven years, as in Yuzawaʼs study. The primary reason reported for becoming a foster parent in both this study and the MHLW survey was to help disadvantaged children. The number of foster children for which the families were responsible when surveyed in the present study averaged slightly over two and was between one or two in the other studies. More than 40percent of foster parents in this study had previously adopted a foster child placed with them, compared to only about 15 percent of foster parents in Yuzawaʼs study.
Table 1. Comparison of Demographic Characteristics of Foster Parents
This study MHLW study Yuzawaʼs study
Survey Area Kyushu-Okinawa and Sapporo-shi, Japan
Nationwide survey, Japan
Nationwide survey, Japan
Survey Period and Year Conducted
24-month period from
2008 to 2010 February 2008 12-month period in 2003
Total Number of Family Foster Homes Surveyed
51 family foster homes (46 foster mothers and 29 foster fathers)
2,626 family foster homes
1,189 family foster homes
Age of Foster Father Mean age 52.1 (SD 9.2) Fifties (39.6%) 50-54 (25.5%) Age of Foster Mother Mean age 53.1 (SD 9.8) Fifties (38.6%) 50-54 (22.0%) Type of Occupation of
Foster Parents
For foster father : retiree (20.9%), For foster mother: full- time housewife (68.0%)
Professions (19.8%)a ―b
Table 1. ( )
This study MHLW study Yuzawaʼs study
Percentage of Foster Parents Who Have Birth Child(ren)
60.8% ― 29.0%
Percentage of Foster Parents Who Have Continued Fostering for more than Seven Years
47.1% ― 50.5%
Length of Wait before Foster Parents Had a Child Placed with Them after Being Licensed
Less than 1 year
(61.2%) ―
More than 1 year and less than 3 years (46.7%)
Reasons for Becoming a Foster Parent
We wanted to help disadvantaged children (43.1%)
We wanted to help disadvantaged children (37.5%)
―
Number of Present
Foster Children 2.2 on average (SD 1.4) One or two (77.9%) 1.3 on average Foster Parentsʼ
Experience of Adopting a Foster Child Placed with Them
We experienced
adoption (45.1%). ― We experienced
adoption (15.6%).
Number of Adopted Children among Foster Parents Who Experienced Adoption
One (82.6%) ― One (85.5%)
Type of Housing Own house (82.6%) Own house (76.6%) ― Type of Family
Household
Nuclear family
household (70.6%) ― ―
Number of Household Members, Including Foster Child(ren)
5.61 on average (SD
2.67) ― ―
Education Level of Foster Mother
High school graduate
(43.8%) ― ―
Religious Beliefs We hold religious
beliefs (25.5%) ― ―
Number of Foster Families Who Had Foster Children Placed with Them at the Time of the Survey
39 households (76.5%) ― ―
Notes: Some percentages presented are for the most frequent responses to that question.
aThe MHLW survey did not ask about the foster motherʼs and foster fatherʼs jobs individually.
bThe “ ” mark indicates that this item was not included in the study.
Findings
In this section I describe the experience of foster parents from the three points of view contained in the theory of roles: role expectation, role performance, and role-taking.
Role expectation is reflected in the motivations for foster parenting.
As Table 1 shows, foster parents in this study were expected to become foster parents out of a desire to help disadvantaged children. Mrs. Abe, a woman in her fifties who had raised four foster children, cited this motivation.2 Her husband was the priest of a Tenri-kyo temple3 in Kitakyushu city, and they had been foster parents for about six years.4 Mrs. Abe expressed her motivation for foster parenting as follows (Sonoi 2013: 161):
You see, we are a Tenri-kyo temple. Our mission is to help people. So I wanted at all times to do something to make myself useful. Since Iʼve got a license as (child caretaker) and have three grown-up birth children, I was wondering if we could become foster parents. My husband and my children told me that it was a good idea and that they were willing to help me.
In this example, it is apparent that Mrs. Abe sought to perform the role associated with her social positions. As a member of Tenri-kyo, she was expected to display a certain type of behavior, namely, pursuing a religious duty to help others.
Another pair of foster parents, Mr. and Mrs. Miura, who were in their seventies and had been foster parents in Sapporo city for 42 years, described their desire to raise children in out-of-home care.5Mr. Miura, an emeritus professor at a university, stated (Sonoi 2013: 203):
2 I use pseudonyms for foster parents and foster children. Interviews with Mr. and Mrs.
Abe were conducted in their home on February 13, 2009.
3 The Tenri-kyo religious organization, one of the largest religious groups in Japan, was established in the late 19th century, during the Edo period.
4 In all cases, the stated length of foster parenting is as of the time of the interview.
5 Interviews with Mr. and Mrs. Miura were conducted in their home on September 25, 2008.
I became a foster parent not because I donʼt have any birth children, but because I would like to bring up children in such a way that they could go to school, adapt themselves to society, and become independent adults.
Mrs. Miura added:
Peopleʼs attitudes toward the foster care system were heavily biased when we registered as foster parents in 1966. People said to us that we were fostering because we did not have children. We decided at the time of our marriage that we wanted to raise children in out-of-home care, whether we had a birth child or not, when we were given a chance to do so.
This example illustrates that Mr. Miura sought to perform the role associated with his social position. Since he was in the teaching profession, society expected him to play an important part in the socialization of children.
Although role performance is conceived as the fulfillment of oneʼs role expectation, some foster parents with difficult children were struggling to perform their expected roles. Mr. and Mrs. Abe had been taking care of an 18-year-old boy named Shohei for about six years.6He required out-of-home care because of negligence by his birth parents.
Mrs. Abe expressed her experience of raising him as follows (Sonoi 2013:
172-173):
When Shohei came here at age 12 in his first year at the junior high school, his overall academic level was extremely low. His academic achievement was that of a seven- or eight-year-old child. We worried very much about whether we could make him independent and help him find a job. His birth parents had not even taught him language properly. He described [an electric fan] as . He was not brought up at a level that was appropriate for his age.
Many times he could hardly understand the meaning of what we said to him. So we hired a private tutor for him to raise his academic standards, but he hated studying. Since he was our first foster child, we felt lots of pressure. We raised him strictly so that he could be independent by age 18.7But he reacted strongly against our disciplined upbringing. He didnʼt behave in the way which we expected. I had lots of fights with my husband over our attitudes toward Shohei
6 The foster childʼs age was at the time of the interview.
7 Foster parenting is officially supposed to end when a foster child reaches 18 years of age in Japan.
and our way of upbringing.
At last, we couldnʼt stand being foster parents for him. We gave up raising him when he was 14 years old. It was about to lead to a family breakdown. We thought that weʼd better take him back to the childrenʼs consultation office [the public child welfare agency]. We met his caseworkers and asked them to take him into their charge. They said that they might change his care plan from foster care to residential group care. So they moved Shohei into a residential care institution. He stayed there for one day.
In the process of performing their role, foster parents learn more about the fostering role through acknowledgment and recognition of their work by significant others, such as schoolteachers. By taking the role of foster parents, foster parents learn how they are supposed to behave as foster parents. Mrs. Abe described the remarks shared with her by Shoheiʼs teachers as follows (Sonoi 2013: 174):
I started to think about Shohei right after he moved to the residential institution. I thought of him all dayhow he was doing there, whether he got meals, and whether he took a bath. I shed tears when I went to bed. I deeply regretted what I had done to him. Then Shoheiʼs judo class teacher said to me,
“Shohei will definitely become delinquent if he lives in a residential institution. I sincerely beg you to let him stay with you. I could help him pass a high school entrance exam and find a job.” I replied, “Weʼll try again and do our best.”
If he hadnʼt said these words to me, I couldnʼt have continued fostering. I would have regretted our decision for the rest of my life. I wouldnʼt have thought anymore that I wanted to take care of foster children. On Shoheiʼs graduation day from junior high school, his homeroom teacher told me that Shoheiʼs performance at school had greatly improved and that he had changed and grown up significantly during these three [junior high school] years among his classmates.
Conclusions
The present research addresses the problems of how foster parents are able to continue fostering by drawing on the theory of roles.
According to Mead, in the process of taking the role of others, an individual develops his or her self as a result of his or her relation to other individuals within the process of social experience in which these
persons are involved (Mead 1934: 135, 138).
Applying this understanding to the fostering context, foster parents might develop their selves as a result of their relation to other individuals, such as the foster childʼs caseworkers and schoolteachers, within the process of activities in which foster parents, caseworkers, and teachers are all involved. That is, foster parents could develop their identities as foster parents through receiving reinforcement of their behavior from caseworkers and schoolteachers and through adopting the outlook expressed by those professionals.
Mr. and Mrs. Abe, for example, could develop their selves as foster parents in this way, by receiving acknowledgement and recognition from Shoheiʼs teachers and adopting their viewpoints. Specifically, they adopted the attitude of Shoheiʼs judo teacher so that they could commit to raising him again, and they took the attitude of Shoheiʼs homeroom teacher so that they could bring him up decently.
In this way foster parents learn to build up their own identity as foster parents and to behave in a way that is socially appropriate for their role. As a result, they can continue fostering as long as they are willing to accept this role.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank all the foster parents who participated in the interviews. Also, I am grateful to all the members of the Japanese Foster Family Association in Sapporo city and in the Kyushu-Okinawa region who made this survey possible.
Funding
This study is supported by the 2014-2017 Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C), Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Research Project Number: 26380733) and by the 2014-2015 Fulbright Visiting Scholar Program.
Bibliography
Abercrombie, N., S. Hill, and B. S. Turner, 2006, ,
Penguin Books.
Andersson, G., 2001, “The Motives of Foster Parents, Their Family and Work
Circumstances,” , 31: 235-248.
Banton, M., 1965, . London: Tavistock
Publications.
Barber, J., and P. Delfabbro, 2005, “Childrenʼs Adjustment to Long-Term Foster Care,”
, 27: 329-340.
Baum, A. C., S. J. Crase, and K. L. Crase, 2001, “Influences on the Decision to Become or Not Become a Foster Parent,”
, 82(2): 202-213.
Buehler, C., M. E. Cox, and G. Cuddeback, 2003, “Foster Parentʼs Perceptions of Factors that Promote or Inhibit Successful Fostering,” Qualitative Social Work 2(1): 61-83.
Colton, M., S. Roberts, and M. Williams, 2008, “The Recruitment and Retention of Family Foster-Carers: An International and Cross-Cultural Analysis,”
, 38: 865-884.
Chamberlain, P., S. Moreland, and K. Reid, 1992, “Enhanced Services and Stipends for Foster Parents: Effects on Retention Rates and Outcomes for Children,” , 71(5): 387-401.
Denby, R., N. Rindfleish, and G. Bean, 1999, “Predictors of Foster Parentʼs Satisfaction and Intent to Continue to Foster,” , 23(3): 287-303.
Fees, B., D. F. Stockdale, S. J. Crase, K. Riggins-Caspers, A. M. Yates, K. S. Lekies, and R.
Gillis-Arnold, 1998, “Satisfaction with Foster Parenting: Assessment One Year after
Training,” , 20(4): 347-363.
Gillis-Arnold, R., S. J. Crase, D. F. Stockdale, and M. C. Shelley, II, 1998, “Parenting Attitudes, Foster Parenting Attitudes, and Motivations of Adoptive and Nonadoptive Foster
Parent Trainees,” , 20(8): 715-732.
Hill, R., 1966, “Contemporary Developments in Family Theory,”
, 28(1): 10-26.
Holland, S., A. Faulkner and R. Perez-del-Agulia, 2005, “Promoting Stability and Continuity of Care for Looked After Children: A Survey and Critical Review,”
, 10: 29-41.
Hudson, P. and K. Levasseur, 2002, “Supporting Foster Parents Caring Voices,”
, 81(6): 853-877.
Kirton, D., 2001, “Love and Money: Payment, Motivation, and the Fostering Task,”
, 6: 199-208.
MacGregor, T. E., S. Rodger, A. L. Cummings, and A. W. Leschied, 2006, “The Needs of Foster Parents: A Qualitative Study of Motivation, Support, and Retention,”
, 5(3): 351-368.
Mead, G. H., 1934, . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 2009,
(= Overview of survey outcome of the children in out- of-home care who were placed in residential care settings in 2007).
Morioka, K. and T. Mochizuki, 1997, (= The New
Family Sociology). Tokyo: Baihukan.
Reiss, I. L., 1965, “The Universality of the Family: A Conceptual Analysis,”
, 27(4): 443-453.
Rhodes, K. W., J. G. Orme, and C. Buehler, 2001, “A Comparison of Family Foster Parents Who Quit, Consider Quitting, and Plan to Continue Fostering,” , 75(1): 84-114.
Rhodes, K. W., J. G. Orme, M. E. Cox, and C. Buehler, 2003a, “Foster Family Resources, Psychological Functioning and Retention,” 27(3): 135-150.
Rhodes, K. W., J. G. Orme, and M. McSurdy, 2003b, “Foster Family Role Performance Responsibilities: Perceptions of Foster Mothers, Fathers, and Workers,”
, 25(12): 935-964.
Sanchirico, A., W. J. Lau, K. Jablonka, and S. J. Russell, 1998, “Foster Parent Involvement in Service Planning: Does it Increase Job Satisfaction?”
, 20(4): 325-346.
Sonoi, Y., 2013, (= The Family Sociology for
Foster Care) Kyoto: Minerva Publishing.
Triseliotis, J., M. Borland, and M. Hill, 1998, “Foster Carers Who Cease to Foster,”
, 22(2): 54-61.
Wilson, L. and J. Conroy, 1999, “Satisfaction of Children in Out-of-Home Care,”
, 78(1): 53-69.
Yarrow, L. J., 1964, “Separation from Parents during Early Childhood,” M. L. Hoffman and L.
W. Hoffman eds., , Vol. 1, New York: Russell
Sage Foundation, 89-136.
Yuzawa, Y., 2004,
(= Research on support for foster parents who look after neglected dependent children), Kodomo-Mirai Zaidan (Children-Future Foundation). Tokyo.
Received January 31, 2017
