Paper
Background. Although crisis nursery services were developed in the early 1970’s to prevent child welfare placements, assessing the effects of their services for families and children presenting with specific problems has been elusive. The limited studies
- issue: Issue 3 / 2008
- authors: Wim De Mey
- keywords: Belgium, multi-modal, behavioural problems, early intervention
- views: 3371
- downloaded: 0
- download pdf (66 Kb)
abstract
Background. The STOP4-7 programme is developed and piloted in Flanders, as an early intervention for young children and their families. All children are referred with serious behavioural problems: oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder, with or without ADHD. Since 2003 the programme is implemented throughout the Netherlands and in 2006 the Minister of Welfare in Flanders ordered to implement STOP4-7 in every province in Flanders. The target population of the programme are young children (aged 4 to 7) with oppositional defiant disorder. The programme consists of a child social skills training (10 sessions of a whole day), a parent management training (10 two hour sessions) and a classroom management training (4 three hour sessions), home visits and school visits. The training itself lasts for three months, but the programme includes the possibility to add home and school visits for another six months, for those families and teachers who needs some additional support.
The programme is published in a manual (De Mey, et al., 2005) and a training for trainers is organised regularly in Flanders and the Netherlands. The past seven years we worked hard to develop an evidence based programme. The intervention is based on the theoretical, research and clinical work of the Oregon Social Learning Centre (Reid, Patterson & Snyder, 2002). This work is also the base of evidence based interventions as Triple P (Sanders, 2003) and the programmes developed by Webster-Stratton(1999, 2006). At the origin of the STOP4-7 intervention is the Linking the Interests of Families and Teachers (LIFT) programme of the OSLC, which proved to be effective.
Purpose. The reported research aimed to measure the effects of the intervention. We used quantitative research methods, in a quasi-experimental design (pre post test comparison between experimental and waiting list-control group). The measures used are the Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL and TRF), the Scale of Parent Behaviour - a Flemish instrument to measure parenting skills, the Parental Scale of Competence (a Dutch translation), and the Wally - an instrument developed by Webster-Stratton to measure problem solving skills in children.
We collected also demographic data and information on the stressful life events (including partner relationship problems). A semi-structured interview with parents was used to evaluate the intervention in a more qualitative way.
Key findings. At the end of 2007 we had gathered data from about 80 families. The first results - without the data of the control group - are very promising: statistical significant effects on all measures (child behaviour, parenting skills, child problem solving, parenting competence and satisfaction), clinical significant changes for half of the children and moderate effect sizes for child behaviour and parenting skills.
81,6% of the children were boys. They are all between 4 and 7 years of age. Most children (64,1%) lived in their family of origin. Half of them had one brother or sister. Most fathers (91%) and mothers (96%) who completed the questionnaires finished their secondary education or followed higher education (including university). At the start the mean CBCL-scores (T-scores on externalizing) were 69,91 and the standard deviation 9,372.
The effect sizes ranged from small (parental competence (PSOC); child behaviour in school (TRF)) to moderate (child behaviour at home (CBCL), positive parenting (SOG)) to big (less inconsequent disciplining (SOG) and more pro social solutions in problem solving (Wally).
The interviews are still under way. The first impressions are that parents are very pleased with the help offered. The positioning of the programme was very important for parents: as an early intervention rather than as a prevention programme. None of the parents saw their children as future delinquents. For politicians on the contrary it seems important to score with the implementation of prevention programmes.
Key references
De Mey, W., Messiaen, V., Van Hulle, N., Merlevede, E., & Winters, S. (2005). Samen sterker Terug Op Pad. Een vroege interventie voor jonge kinderen met gedragsproblemen. Amsterdam: Uitgeverij SWP.
Kazdin, A. E., & Weisz, J. R. (1998). Identifying and Developing Empirically Supported Child and Adolescent Treatments. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66(1), 19-36.
Reid, J. B., Patterson, G. R., & Snyder, J. (2002). Antisocial Behavior in Children and Adolescents. A Developmental Analysis and Model for Intervention. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sanders, M. R., Markie-Dadds, C., & Turner, K. M. T. (2003). Theoretical, Scientific and Clinical Foundations of the Triple P-Positive Parenting Program: A Population Approach to the Promotion of Parenting Competence. Parenting Research and Practice Monograph (Vol. 1). The Parenting and Family Support Centre, The University of Queensland.
Webster-Stratton, C. (1999). How to Promote Children's Social and Emotional Competence. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
Webster-Stratton, C. (2006). The Incredible Years. A Trouble-Shooting Guide for Parents of Children Aged 2-8 Years. Seattle, Incredible Years.
Contacts: Wim De Mey, Ghent University, Department of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, STOP-team, Ghent University, H. Dunantlaan 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium, E-mail: Wim.demey@ugent.be, Phone 0032 474 87 05 02.