Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal

, Volume 9, Issue 6, pp 541–554 | Cite as

Keeping in touch: Ecological factors related to foster care visitation

  • Daphna Oyserman
  • Rami Benbenishty


Visitation, assumed to be important for children in foster care, has not been studied in sufficent detail. In the present study, patterns and characteristics of home and foster family visitation and telephone contact are described in a national sample of children in foster care in Israel (n=590). Relations between child, biological and foster family characteristics are explored by type of contact and foster placement. Parent-child contact is most strongly related to foster family characteristics and relations with the biological family. Patterns differ for relative and nonrelative foster families.


Social Psychology Foster Care Ecological Factor National Sample Care Visitation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ben-Rabi, D. (1990) Children in Israel — Family background. Masters Thesis. School of Social Work, Hebrew University.Google Scholar
  2. Benbenishty, R. & Oyserman, D. (1990). Assessment of foster families. Hebrew University of Jerusalem.Google Scholar
  3. Benbenishty, R., & Oyserman, D. (1991). A clinical information system for foster care in Israel.Child Welfare, LXX(2), 229–242.Google Scholar
  4. Benbenishty, R., Oyserman, D., & Ben-Rabi, D. (1990). The clinical situation of children in foster care in Israel: Findings from the clinical monitoring system. Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel.Google Scholar
  5. Cautley, P. W. (1980).New foster parents. New York: Human Sciences Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dando, I. & Minty, B. (1987). What makes good foster parents.British Journal of Social Work, 17, 383–400.Google Scholar
  7. Downes, C. (1988). Foster families for adolescents: The healing potential of time-limited placements.British Journal of Social Work, 18, 473–487.Google Scholar
  8. Fanshel, D. (1975). Parental visiting in foster care: Key to discharge.Social Service Review, 49, 493–514.Google Scholar
  9. Fanshel, D. (1978).Computerized information for child welfare: The availability and capacities of children in foster care for services involvement. NY: Columbia Univ School of Social Work.Google Scholar
  10. Fanshel, D. & Shinn, E. (1978).Children in foster care. New York: Columbia University.Google Scholar
  11. Fein, E., Maluccio, A. N., Hamilton, V. J., & Ward, D. E. (1983). Descriptions and comparisons of children in each type of permanent home.Child Welfare, 62(6), 524–534.Google Scholar
  12. Finch, S., Fanshel, D. & Grundy, (1986). Factors associated with the discharge of children from foster care.Social Work Research and Abstracts, 22(1), 10–18.Google Scholar
  13. Goerge, R. M. (1990). The reunification process in substitute care.Social Service Review. 64(3), 422–457.Google Scholar
  14. Hayes, C. D. (1987).Risking the future: Adolescent sexuality, pregnancy, and childrearing, (Vol. 1), Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hess, P. (1988). Case and context: Determinants of planned visit frequency in foster family care.Child Welfare, 87(3), 311–326.Google Scholar
  16. Jenkins, S. (1967). Duration of foster care: Some relevant antecedent variables.Child Welfare, 46, 450–455.Google Scholar
  17. Kadushin, A. & Martin, J. (1988).Child Welfare Services, 4th Edition. NY: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  18. Kagitcibasi, C., & Berry, J. (1989). Cross-cultural psychology: Current research and trends.Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 493–531.Google Scholar
  19. Lawder, E. A., Poulin, J. E., & Andrews, R. G. (1985).185 foster children five years after placement. Philadelphia, Pa.: Research Center, Children's Aid Society of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  20. Maas, H. (1969). Children in long-term foster care.Child Welfare, 48, 321–333.Google Scholar
  21. McIntyre, A., Lounsbury, K. R., Berntson, D., & Steel, H. (1988). Psychosocial characteristics of foster children.Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 9(2), 125–137.Google Scholar
  22. Milner, J. L. (1987). An ecological perspective on duration of foster care.Child Welfare, LXVI(2, March–April), 113–123.Google Scholar
  23. Oyserman, D., Benbenishty, R., & Ben-Rabi, D. (1992). Monitoring foster care in Israel: Characteristics of Children and their families at entry into foster care.Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 22(3), 199–211.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Proch, K. & Howard, J. A. (May–June 1986). Parental visiting of children in foster care.Social Work, 31(3), 178–181.Google Scholar
  25. Radin, N., Benn, R., & Oyserman, D. (1991). The influence of grandfathers on the young children of teen mothers. In P. K. Smith (Ed.),The psychology of grandparenthood: An international perspective. UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  26. Rowe, J. Cain, H., Hundleby, M., & Keane, A. (1984).Long-term foster care. London: Batsford Academic and Educational.Google Scholar
  27. Seaberg, J. R. & Tolley, E. S. (1986). Predictors of the length of stay in foster care.Social Work Research and Abstracts, 22(3), 11–17.Google Scholar
  28. Zimmerman, R. B. (1982) Foster care in retrospect,Tulane Studies in Social Welfare.14. New Orleans, Tulane University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daphna Oyserman
    • 1
  • Rami Benbenishty
    • 1
  1. 1.Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations