Assessment procedures should better account for trauma, says psychologist Claire Francica
Psychologists and foster care groups have raised concerns about delays and supervised access visits. Counselling psychologist Claire Francica (inset) wants a complete overhaul of the system.
Court delays in issuing long-term care orders have left 71 children waiting in limbo, a problem foster care advocates say has worsened since a 2020 legal change removed a previous deadline.
Figures obtained from the Ministry for Social Policy and Children’s Rights show 47 care order decisions are pending in court, affecting 71 children. Half of those cases have been waiting for a judgment for more than a year.
Four cases have been ongoing for more than three years, nine for over two years and 15 for more than a year, the ministry said.
Care orders are intended to protect children at risk of significant harm by placing them in safer arrangements, such as foster families.
John Role’, from the National Foster Care Association Malta, said court delays are causing significant stress for children as well as their foster and biological families.
In the past, interim care orders were issued provisionally by the social policy minister, after which the court had 28 days to issue a final care order.
Legal amendments issued in 2020 shifted responsibility for interim care orders to the courts instead. However, the changes also removed the deadline for issuing a long-term care order.
Role’ noted that while the law states fostering can become permanent after two years (following a rigorous process), those two years only start counting once the long-term care order is issued.
The ministry figures also show other child-related orders awaiting court decisions.
They include 11 applications to free children for adoption, two removal orders affecting seven children, and 12 supervision orders impacting 16 children.
A total of 227 children and youths are currently in foster care, including 26 aged between 18 and 21 years old. There are 172 foster families with a child placed, 44 families offering respite placements, and seven families currently in discussions for a potential match.
Role’ also said that the current way supervised access visits (SAVs) are being carried out is traumatising.
Better-trained staff
Counselling psychologist Claire Francica, who specialises in trauma and is regularly appointed by the family court, shares these concerns.
She raised serious questions about how SAVs are conducted, warning that inadequate training and supervision may be retraumatising children and failing both biological and foster families.
Francica said one magistrate currently oversees cases involving SAVs, which typically take place at a centre in Marsa or at Appoġġ after a social worker collects the child from the foster home.
She said SAVs are frequently supervised by individuals who lack the specialised training required to deal with complex childhood trauma.
Some supervisors are students reading for a BA degree, she said, while others are employed simply to fill vacancies rather than as qualified professionals.
If the issue is a lack of resources, Francica argued, an internal training and certification system should be introduced, potentially designed in collaboration with the University of Malta.
System overhaul needed
Francica warned that insufficient training can lead to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and trauma going unrecognised. This, she said, risks creating a misleading or incomplete picture for the courts. Francica warned that insufficient training can lead to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and trauma going unrecognised. This, she said, risks creating a misleading or incomplete picture for the courts.
She described cases in which biological parents arrived for visits while intoxicated or under the influence of drugs and refused to seek help.
Francica said the visits themselves can be retraumatising, as children are repeatedly separated from their foster carers – picked up from their home by a social worker who is essentially a stranger to them – and taken to see their biological parent.
She described instances in which biological parents end up crying in bathrooms and regressing emotionally when their child refuses to go with them.
Calling for what she described as an “overall overhaul” of the system, Francica said therapists should be required to carry out fieldwork, including visiting homes and being present during SAVs. She also stressed the need to educate and support foster carers, noting that they may themselves develop trauma through the process.
Francica called for assessment procedures to better account for trauma, anxiety and attachment disorders. She also suggested sanctions to suspend or stop SAVs when biological parents refuse to engage or make no effort to comply with requirements.
She said therapists involved in such cases must be properly specialised in working with children and trauma, arguing that current training levels are insufficient to address the complexity of these situations. She also raised concerns about what she described as unclear legislation surrounding open adoption. A ministry spokesperson said supervised access visits depend on court decrees.
Once a court decree on SAV is issued, the visits are carried out following a comprehensive assessment and a multidisciplinary team review and are implemented in line with the specific needs of each case, the spokesperson said. The ministry said visits operate within clearly defined parameters to safeguard the safety, welfare and best interests of minors.
The spokesperson added all employees receive comprehensive training and are thoroughly briefed on the complex requirements of their role.
Training covers a wide range of critical areas, including domestic violence, trauma-informed practice, attachment awareness, substance misuse, safeguarding of minors and infants, managing challenging adolescent behaviour, loss and grief, parental alienation, disability awareness and early years development. All supervisors are also trained in ‘Crisis Prevention Intervention’, a certified training programme.
The ministry added that whenever children move between homes there is always an impact, and children react in different ways. Some internalise their emotions, while others exhibit aggressive behaviour or regress developmentally.
Regression or aggression does not necessarily mean the time spent with the non-custodial parent was unproductive or that the child was uncomfortable.
There are instances where SAVs go well and the child bonds with the non-custodial parent, yet still exhibits difficult behaviour upon returning home. This can occur because many children experience what is known as mixed loyalties, the spokesperson said.
The removal of access, the spokesperson added, should not serve as punishment for lack of compliance by biological parents. However, if there are serious concerns about the child’s well-being during SAVs, the law provides for access to be removed.