| Course | PAC 414 Child Abuse and Neglect |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 6 |
| Paper type | Child welfare response paper |
| Length | About 1,008 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Psychology and Addiction Studies |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PAC 414 Module 6
After the Call: Investigation, Family Assessment and the Evidence on Foster Care for Children Whose Mother Is in Treatment
Student Name
Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University
PAC 414: Child Abuse and Neglect
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
After the Call: Investigation, Family Assessment and the Evidence on Foster Care for Children Whose Mother Is in Treatment
In Module 5, Dana, an addiction counselor, reported that her client Monique had left her four- and six-year-old alone overnight while she used methamphetamine. This paper follows the report into the child welfare system, using the invented county and agencies of these papers. Monique, her children and her mother are composites, and the cited studies are real.
From Hotline to Assignment
When the report reached the state hotline, a screener decided whether it met the criteria for a child welfare response. It did: young children left without supervision overnight fit the state's definition of neglect. The screener then assigned the case to one of two tracks. In the traditional investigation track, a worker gathers evidence to determine whether maltreatment occurred, a finding called substantiation, and decides whether the child is safe. In the family assessment or alternative response track, available in many states for reports that do not involve serious harm, a worker assesses the family's needs and strengths and connects the family with services, without a formal finding of maltreatment. Because the children were safe with their grandmother and Monique was already in treatment, the case was assigned to family assessment. The screener noted that the report came from a treatment provider and included the children's current placement, details that made it possible to judge the immediate risk.
What Substantiation Does and Does Not Tell
Child welfare systems have long used substantiation to decide which families receive services. Research has questioned this. Drake et al. (2003) found that children in unconfirmed cases came back to the system nearly as often as children in confirmed ones, suggesting that substantiation did not separate high-risk from low-risk families well. Kohl et al. (2009) went further, using a national study of children in contact with child welfare. Children in substantiated and unsubstantiated cases showed similar developmental, behavioral and health problems and similar needs for services, and their later outcomes did not differ meaningfully. The authors argued that child welfare systems should leave substantiation behind as the main basis for decisions and provide services based on assessed needs.
The Evidence on Foster Care
When children cannot safely remain at home, foster care, including care by relatives, protects them. But removal also carries harms, including separation from parents, changes of school and home and the stress of the system. Doyle (2007) studied children in Illinois investigated for maltreatment, taking advantage of the fact that cases were assigned to investigators essentially at random and that investigators differed in how often they placed children. For children on the margin, whose placement depended on which investigator they happened to receive, those placed in foster care had worse outcomes as they grew up, including higher rates of juvenile delinquency, teen births and lower earnings, than similar children who remained home. Doyle emphasized that his findings applied to marginal cases, not to children in clear danger, for whom removal may be essential.
The Possible Pathways
| Pathway | What it involves | Fit for this family |
|---|---|---|
| Screened out | No response | Not appropriate; criteria were met |
| Investigation | Evidence gathering; substantiation decision; possible removal | Possible, but the children were already safe |
| Family assessment | Needs and strengths assessment; voluntary services | Chosen: low current risk, mother in treatment |
| In-home services | Services with children at home, often with a safety plan | The goal once Monique is stable |
| Foster care or kinship placement | Children placed out of the home | Informal kinship care already in place with grandmother |
The Plan
The family assessment worker met with Monique, her mother and the children. Together they developed a safety plan: the children would continue living with their grandmother while Monique completed the intensive phase of treatment, with daily visits supervised by her mother. The worker connected Monique with a parenting program for parents in recovery and arranged child care assistance, which would help once the children returned home. The children were referred for a developmental screening and a children's group for families affected by substance use. With Monique's consent, the worker coordinated with Dana to receive updates on attendance and drug testing. The plan set milestones for the children's return: sixty days of negative tests, consistent attendance, a stable home and child care in place.
Why Not Investigation
An investigation would have been a legitimate response. Leaving young children alone overnight is serious. But the purpose of an investigation, determining whether maltreatment occurred, added little here, since Monique had already disclosed what happened. The more useful questions were whether the children were safe now, what Monique and her mother needed and how to prevent another night like that one. The research on substantiation suggests that an investigation's finding would not have told the agency much about the children's needs. The family assessment track focused on those questions directly and, by approaching the family as partners, made it more likely that Monique would stay in treatment and that her mother would continue caring for the children.
The Family's Experience
For Monique, the report and the worker's visit were frightening, and she feared that the children would be taken. She had heard stories at her treatment program of parents who lost their children for years, and she arrived at the first meeting expecting to be judged. The family assessment approach, with its focus on strengths and services, eased that fear. Her mother, who had felt overwhelmed, received support and a clear timeline. The children were told, in words their ages could understand, that their mother was getting help to get better and that they would go home when she was ready.
Conclusion
After the call, the child welfare system had several paths. Drake and colleagues and Kohl, Jonson-Reid and Drake show that substantiation is a poor guide to children's needs, and Doyle shows that for children on the margin, foster care can do more harm than good. For Monique's family, a family assessment response, kinship care with her mother, treatment and clear milestones offered safety for the children and a path back home.
References
Doyle, J. J., Jr. (2007). Child protection and child outcomes: Measuring the effects of foster care. American Economic Review, 97(5), 1583-1610. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583
Drake, B., Jonson-Reid, M., Way, I., & Chung, S. (2003). Substantiation and recidivism. Child Maltreatment, 8(4), 248-260. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559503258930
Kohl, P. L., Jonson-Reid, M., & Drake, B. (2009). Time to leave substantiation behind: Findings from a national probability study. Child Maltreatment, 14(1), 17-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077559508326030
What the PAC 414 Module 6 instructions ask for
The child welfare response is the sixth module of PAC 414, and assignments typically ask you to explain what happens after a report and to evaluate the options with evidence. Take the Module 6 instructions in your Aspen course as the governing text; the family is invented. Describe screening, investigation and alternative or family assessment responses. Explain substantiation and its limits. Present evidence on the effects of foster care and of in-home services. Apply the options to a family, including safety planning. Address the parent's treatment and the role of relatives. Support every claim with a full APA 7 citation, and describe the family's experience as well as the system's steps. Set clear milestones for reunification. Include relatives who already care for the children.
How the PAC 414 Module 6 example is put together
The hotline screened in the report and assigned it to the family assessment track. Kohl, Jonson-Reid and Drake's Child Maltreatment study from a national sample shows substantiation tells little about children's needs. Drake and colleagues' study in the same journal shows that unsubstantiated cases carry real risk. Doyle's American Economic Review study shows worse outcomes for marginal children placed in foster care. A five-row table compares screening out, investigation, family assessment, in-home services and foster care. The plan keeps the children with their grandmother temporarily under a safety plan, supports Monique's treatment and returns them home as she meets clear milestones: sixty days of negative tests, steady attendance, a stable home and child care.
Where the marks sit in the PAC 414 Module 6 rubric
A strong child welfare paper describes the system accurately, uses the evidence on each option with care and ends with a plan that weighs safety against keeping the family together. This example explains alternative response and why it suited this family. Kohl, Jonson-Reid and Drake's finding is used to argue that services should follow needs rather than substantiation labels. Doyle's study is reported with its key qualification, that it applies to children on the margin, not to children in clear danger. The table makes the options comparable. The plan uses kinship care and treatment, the least disruptive safe option, with clear milestones for reunification. The children's own needs are screened.
PAC 414 Module 6 help from the desk
Child welfare papers often describe the system as only investigation and removal. Explain screening, alternative response, in-home services and kinship care. Explain substantiation and its limits. Use evidence on foster care accurately, including that it helps some children and harms others at the margin. Plan safety concretely. Connect services to the parent's treatment. Include relatives, who often provide the safest placement. Describe the family's experience, including fear and stigma. Avoid presenting either removal or keeping children home as always right. Name the milestones that would allow children to return home, so the family knows what success looks like. Explain the plan to the children in words they can understand.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More PAC 414 and Psychology and Addiction Studies sample papers
- PAC 414 Module 1: Types and Prevalence of Child Maltreatment
- PAC 414 Module 2: Recognizing Signs of Abuse
- PAC 414 Module 3: Recognizing Neglect
- PAC 414 Module 4: Parental Substance Use and Child Maltreatment
- PAC 414 Module 5: Mandated Reporting
- PAC 414 Module 7: Trauma and the Needs of Maltreated Children
- PAC 414 Module 8: Supporting Families and Preventing Maltreatment
- PAC 320 Module 1: The History and Theory of Addiction
- PAC 201 Module 3: Physical and Brain Development in Infancy
- PAC 405 Module 6: Child-Centered Therapy
- PAC 102 Module 1: Substance Use Among Adolescents and Young Adults
PAC 414 Module 6 questions, answered
What does PAC 414 Module 6 usually ask for?
Aspen's PAC 414 covers the child welfare response in this module, so explaining what happens after a report and evaluating options with evidence is typical. Review your Module 6 prompt.
What is alternative or family assessment response?
A child welfare track for lower-risk reports that focuses on assessing needs and providing services rather than on investigating and substantiating.
Does substantiation predict which children need help?
Kohl, Jonson-Reid and Drake found children in substantiated and unsubstantiated cases had similar needs, so substantiation is a poor guide to services.
Where can I find a free PAC 414 Module 6 sample paper?
This page holds the full paper: the child welfare response after a report, with a table of pathways and the plan chosen for one family.
Is foster care better for children than staying home?
Doyle found children on the margin of placement, where investigators might decide either way, did better if they stayed home than if placed in foster care.