The permanency planning and the family preservation are related in the sense that they are both aimed at ensuring that a child gets the best care possible. The goal of permanency planning and family preservation is to enhance the welfare of the children. Social workers play an important role in promoting the welfare of the children. They do that by working closely with the families, guardians, and other stakeholders in creating a favorable environment for children. A favorable environment should be one free of any form of mistreatment and abuse ( Tanenhaus, 2001) . Social workers ensure that a child has access to basic needs, including meaningful relationship with their families.
The main difference between the permanency planning and family preservation is that in the latter, parents are empowered to care for their children in their homes ( D'Andrade & Berrick, 2006) . Permanency planning involves taking the child from their parental home to a foster care system. However, despite the differences between the two systems, social workers ensure that children maintain strong bonds with their parents and guardians. There are assumptions surrounding the permanency planning. The main assumption is that children are denied an opportunity to establish meaningful relationships with their parents. While that is not necessarily the truth, there are certain gaps that need to be addressed in both the permanency and family preservation. The financial and relationship aspects need to be addressed. In both cases, the goal should be to ensure that the child continues to enjoy the family bonds.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
More resources should be allocated towards the family preservation. Most parents can improve the welfare of their children if they have the resources. Poverty is the main hindrance in most families. The social workers should liaise with other stakeholders in ensuring that such families can be supported to take care of their children instead of taking them to children homes.
References
D'Andrade, D. & Berrick, D. (2006) when policy meets practice: The untested effects of permanency reforms in child welfare. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare. 23(1).
Tanenhaus, S. (2001). Growing up dependent: family preservation in early twentieth-century Chicago. Law and History Review, 19(3).
