This article is about children placed in foster care and how they became in society. It’s a political ans social subject who raises many questions, larges-scale studies have been launched such as “ELAP”, a longitudinal study which began in 2013. However, the results remain mixed and above all, to be interpreted with caution because if certain figures allow conclusions to be drawn, there are as many courses as there are children taken into care within the Childhood Social Assistance (ASE). The particularity of each of these stories testifies to the difficulty in providing a satisfactory answer to this questioning. In our study, we will focus more particularly on children placed in foster care, because the latter represents the most frequent type of placement with 47% in 2017 (DREES, 2018). If the ideas conveyed suggest that these young people have a more favorable future than other placements, we will seek to know what is the future of children placed in foster care?
First of all, according to the longitudinal study by Mouhot (2001) on the fate of 49 children placed in Social Assistance to Children (ASE), it emerges a traumatic experience inherited from a heavy liability. Indeed, certain pathological relationships and the separation with the parents during the placement is experienced as a real trauma for these children who have become adults. This trauma fundamentally affects the desire to live, confidence in others and self-esteem. It can lead some to behave in extremes in order to elicit a reaction from parents or to get their attention. As a teenager, many have existential questions that revolve around abandonment and “why me”.
The defense mechanisms found in these adolescents are mainly repression, projection or even manic defense.
Then, still in the study of Mouhot (2001), the affective reorganization of these adults revolves around repression in adolescence and will help block the trauma. For the most part, talking about their history has allowed them to shed their traumatic past, gain recognition as a victim and also have confirmation of what they remember. Remembering is therefore the best way to forget in this case. In addition, 30% of young adults do research on their parents to get a reality of their story, waiting to be at a key moment in their life to begin this research (marriage, first child). They allow them to understand their parents’ experience, their character and to find a reason for their placement. Many look for references to childhood, such as photos, objects, which, if found, are often treasured. This research also helps to understand the system put in place during placement and some may even go so far as to blame the institutions for having “let their parents destroy themselves without doing anything”.
For those who do not wish to know, it is often due to a fear or fear of revealing hidden secrets that can be even more traumatic.
Finally, the study by Frechon and Dumaret (2008) shows little suicidal behavior. On the other hand, it emerges from acts of acting out (alcohol, delinquency) and certain psychopathologies such as borderline organization or psychosis, but they have not been able to establish a link between the trauma or certain abuses experienced as determining for the development of such pathologies. Anderson (1997) nevertheless shows that 27% of ex-placed are followed by a psychologist or a psychiatrist and present at the same time deviant and psychiatric behaviors (cited by Frechon & Dumaret, 2008).
In order to go further in the analysis of the fate of children in care, it is necessary to observe a few figures, in particular about two pillars of adult life: professional and social integration. While the onset of adulthood is generally characterized by a phase of finding employment, trying out, and sometimes returning home; the children leaving the ASE scheme have little room for experimentation and fall into the adult world, sometimes presenting some vulnerabilities.
Children who have been fostered by foster families show favorable results: they are the most under-represented in the “no diploma” category (25% against 36% for those who have not finished their placement in foster families) . They are also the most important category having obtained a CAP (35%) or a professional bac (Frechon & Breugnot, 2018). However, some authors remind us of the importance of putting these results into perspective with regard to students who are very often a few years behind (due to repeating a year or dropping out of school, for example); however, most of the results judge the level of education at the age of 18. This is where the interest of the young adult contract (CJM) comes into play, which allows the extension beyond the majority of social assistance support to children. Indeed, 75% of young people still placed after their 18 years old are in training, so they are 41% in this sample (all placements combined) to reach the bac level when they are between 21 and 22 years old (Frechon, Breugnot & Marquet, 2017). The analysis of the evolution thanks to the CJM is relevant here since the probability that a young person prolongs with such a contract in the majority is high at 55% for the children in foster family against only 32% in collective investment (Frechon & Marquet, 2018).
As regards precariousness, in particular the use of aid services (temporary accommodation and free catering), only 35% of these young people come from a family placement while 51% have lived in a hostel (Frechon & Marpsat, 2016).
In terms of social integration, many studies have found a lower relational network for ex-children in care compared to the general population (Quinton & Hill, cited by Frechon & Dumaret, 2008). However, friendly relations represent an important resource in a generally poor family context (Frechon & Dumaret, 2008). We note that the feeling of isolation is higher among individuals who have lived through multiple placements, so these results would be in favor of children placed in foster care. Today professionals tend to strengthen the “social capital” of young people which acts as a protective factor, in a positive way and facilitates integration. (Kerivel, 2015).
The study by Corbillon, Assailly and Duyme (1998) made it possible to know whether in the long term, former children in care were more able to place their children than the general population. But the reproduction of the behavior is only 5 to 6%, so it seems complicated to speak of any pattern. One variable, however, retained our attention in this study: adults who were admitted early (between 0 and 1 years) are much less represented in the group of behavioral “reproducers” than adults who were admitted late (3.5% against 18.5%). Pupils also represent only 7% of “behavior breeders” against 93% of those who were “on guard”. If the results show that having lived a placement does not necessarily imply the placement of his own children, the low reproduction rate among the “wards” may raise the hypothesis of the therapeutic nature of a stable family placement, which supports the ideas that such an investment would be favorable.
The foster family plays an important role and affiliation ties will have an impact on the child’s relationship to it, ties which may last but also be a source of conflict. In addition, there are other problems such as the follow-up of children who have left ASE and many find themselves without work, without housing and with a lack of reference points.
Key words : host family, placed children, social insertion, social impact, social psychology
Bibliography :
Corbillon, M., Assailly, J.P., Duyme M. (1998). L’aide sociale à l’enfance : descendance et devenir adulte des sujets placés. Population, 43(2), 473-479. Consulté de http://www.persee.fr/doc/pop_0032-4663_1988_num_43_2_17050
Etudes & Résultats DRESS. (2018). 341 mesures d’aide sociale à l’enfance en cours fin 2017. (1090). Consulté de https://drees.solidarites-sante.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/er1090.pdf
Frechon, I., & Dumaret, A.C. (2008). Bilan de 50 ans d’études sur le devenir adulte des enfants placés. Neuropsychiatrie de l’enfance et de l’adolescence, 56, 135-147. doi:10.1016/j.neurenf.2008.01.015
Frechon, I., & Marpsat, M. (2016). Placement dans l’enfance et précarité de la situation de logement. Economie et statistique, 488-489. Consulté de https://www.insee.fr/fr/statistiques/2123144?sommaire=2123156
Frechon, I., Breugnot, P., Marquet, L. (2017). La fin du parcours en protection de l’enfance. Lorsque le passé dessine l’avenir. Les enjeux du parcours de l’enfant en Mecs. Entre attachements, co-responsabilité et transversalité, 85-111. https://www.ined.fr/fichier/rte/General/Minisite-Elap/Frechon_Mecs_Paris.pdf
Frechon, I., Breugnot, P. (2018). Accueil en protection de l’enfance et conditions de sortie sous le prisme du placement familial. Document non publié. Retrouvé à https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01831900/document
Frechon, I., & Marquet, L. (2018). Sortir de la protection de l’enfance à la majorité ou poursuivre en contrat jeune majeur. Document non publié. Retrouvé à https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01837210/document
Kerivel, A. (2015). Etre adulte en sortant de structure d’aide sociale à l’enfance, le capital social au coeur de la définition de l’autonomie. Vie sociale, 4(12), 107-127. doi: 10.3917/vsoc.154.0107
Mouhot, F. (2001). Le devenir des enfants. De l’aide sociale à l’enfance. Devenir, 1 (13),31-66. doi: 10.3917/dev.011.0031