Vulnerable
families in Ukraine as the main social service users: comparison of the
pre-pandemic and pandemic period
Introduction
In the
21st century, humanity faced a pandemic - COVID-19 which caused a collapse in
all spheres of society and economy and led to humanitarian, socio-economic, and
medical crises in the world (Thompson & Rasmussen, 2020). People had to
learn how to live in new conditions and fight with insidious disease. Many
countries closed their boundaries, declared lockdowns and other strict response
measures (Nay, 2020) to keep their citizens safe. All these heightened risk
factors are influencing already vulnerable populations, including families,
making their already rather difficult situations worse. Moreover, the system of
social protection of families and vulnerable families particularly also faced
new challenges. Social service providers had to adapt programs and meet the
evolving needs of all families during the pandemic. Ukraine is not the
exception. But there is one big difference between the world and Ukraine in
social work practice: the beginning of the pandemic in the world coincided with
the development of a new system of providing social services at the level of
territorial communities in Ukraine. So, this paper will 1) summarize the
existing approaches to “family” understanding and studies regarding the problem
of vulnerability of families and role of different factors causing family
vulnerability before the pandemic and at the beginning of it; 2) provide brief
analysis of Ukrainian system of social work with families, vulnerable families
started to be provided; 3) present data regarding vulnerability among families
in Ukraine in 2019 and in 2020, factors that caused vulnerability; 4) inform
about social service providers activity in turn to help vulnerable families to cope
with problems before and in the time of pandemic; and 4) provide
recommendations for government and local social agencies working with
vulnerable families how to make their work better.
1
Literature Review
1.1
Determination of
families and vulnerable families
Family is
regarded as a major social institution where individuals do their social
activity. It is “a unit of two or more people united by marriage, blood,
adoption, or consensual union, in general consulting a single household, interacting
and communicating with each other” (Desai, 1994). In the UNESCO report (1992),
family is characterized as “all people living in one household”. Moreover, even
if its members do not share a household because they are temporarily away,
family as a unit may exist as a social reality.
Despite
the different approaches towards defining the family in reviewed literature, it
is important to mention that we characterize family as microsociety created by
one or more person trying to construct an intimate environment, based on shared
goals, trust and accountability. In families people meet various needs
(physiological, emotional, etc.), provide support and sustenance, continuity
between past and future generations. Families force various functions such as:
differentiates regulation of sexual behavior,
reproduction, economic cooperation, education, affection, protection and
emotional support and social status (Anastasiu,
2012). But they changed drastically in recent years (Eneh,
Nnama-Okechukwu, …, & Okoye, 2017) mainly because
of industrialization and specialization of society.
The nature
and structure of the family has changed over the years too. For example, Park
(2013) differentiates three types of families: nuclear, joint
and three-generation ones. However, Oelze (2000)
points out nuclear, single, extended, childless, stepfamily and grandparent
types of families. The last classification of family types is closer to
Ukraine. In the works of Ukrainian researchers Kobylanska
(2017) and Kozachenko (2010) we can find provness of that. Moreover, Kobylanska
(2017) add so-called “distant families” that exists in Ukraine – families where
one of its members or more are far away for a long period because of work,
detention, or treatment.
Regardless
of type, all families can lead their own life, do routine tasks, cope with
stress, strength and conflicts, share and involve
resources, care about each other or children etc. However, sometimes families
get into difficult, stressful situations, which are beyond their control, and
as a result, they cannot cope with them and become inadequate or exhausted.
Certain social situations or life stages when individual or family need support
with social, health and economic (Vironkannas et al.,
2020) or material, social and emotional (Radcliff et al., 2012) problems are
defined as vulnerable. Situations when families’ needs cannot be met within
their own resources or their kith and kinship networks
have impact on families’ life are determined as vulnerability (Arney & Scott, 2011).
“Vulnerable
families” have a particular need for socially responsible, professionally
provided support, protection of children growing up within the family (Bauer,
& Wiezorek, 2016). In Ukraine it should be
provided at the territorial communities by creating and delivering of social
services vulnerable families need (Slozanska, Horishna, & Romanovska,
2020).
1.2
Factors that contribute
to family vulnerability
Vulnerable
families tend to suffer from high levels of stress and isolation resulting from
lack of support networks, financial or health problems, job-related
difficulties, or other negative factors that lead to emotional distress,
conflict, relational difficulty for family members, poor parenting
and ineffective communication (Task Force on the Family, 2003, p. 1542). To
factors that have negative influence on the families Slee
(2006) refers life changes, social inclusion, living environments, housing and
residential mobility, neighborhoods and social
cohesion, mental and emotional health, well-being, support for parenting,
childcare, service planning and provision, intersectional action (integrated
service delivery). “Chronic and multiple disadvantage,
stressful life events and children with ongoing physical, developmental,
emotional/behavior problems” can also cause problems
in families with which they cannot cope alone without external help and support
(Slee, 2006).
All
risk-factors families can face Gitterman (2014)
structured into two groups: 1) life conditions and 2) life circumstances and
events. While, Timshel,
Montgomery and Dalgaard (2017) differentiate
individual, family, societal and cultural levels of them.
Based on
the existing literature, that demonstrate different approaches to
identification and characterization of risk factors influencing family, we
grouped them into two blocks:
internal - mental or other disability, age, illness,
inability to take care or protect of oneself (Fawcett, 2009; Koeneke, Witt, & Oehme,
2015); absence of communication, interaction and emotional support (Chereni, 2017; Șoitu, 2015);
death, divorce, imprisonment, participation in hostilities, depression (Prasad,
Devi, Khasgiwala, & Vaswani, 2009; Van Hook,
2019); violence (Ribeiro et al., 2021) etc.;
external – natural disasters, radical social economic
and cultural changes, socially expected tasks and functions (Gomes, & Martinho, 2021), family disorganization, breaking
relationship, gender, stage of life, level of resources (Alston, Hazeleger, & Hargreaves, 2019; Berzin,
2010); interactions between individuals and social environments (Hollomotz, 2009); family size, poverty incidence (Orbeta Jr, 2005); risks, shocks, stress and isolation
(Lloyd, King, & Chenoweth, 2002; Terrion, 2006)
etc.
All
factors mentioned above can have short and long-term negative outcomes for
families. Long term perspective of being under the influence of risk factors
leads to stigmatization of vulnerable families (Vironkannas,
Liuski, & Kuronen,
2020). In time and even early support of families and early intervention,
assess to social services can have protective effect and prevent falling into
the category of vulnerable (Slozanska, 2018; Slozanska, Horishna, 2016;
Fawcett, 2009). Focus on the factor generating vulnerability among families is
in prerogative for social workers working with vulnerable families or
preventing vulnerability among families. The ranges of factors, which
individually or in combination can contribute to short or long-term
vulnerability, have to be identified and classified by
social worker before providing services in a local community where families
live (Slozanska, 2018). It is especially important in
time of the pandemic, when the cases of domestic abuse and family violence
increased dramatically (Usher, et al., 2020). Families also suffer from
economic stress, disaster-related instability, enhanced exposure to
exploitative relationships, and reduced options for support (Peterman et al.,
2020). Social isolation (van Gelder et al., 2020) starts to be the factor
causes the vulnerability among families.
At the
beginning of COVID-2019 Ukraine has just finished implementing of the first
stage of social welfare reform. Due to it social services have
to be provided at the territorial communities for people in need,
including vulnerable families by qualified social workers. Social service
providers have to be created in territorial
communities for that. So, the aim of the study is to examine factors causing
vulnerability among families in Ukraine before and in time of the pandemic and
what impact social services providers have on the families in territorial
communities to prevent or cope with vulnerability. Recommendations are proposed
to make social work with vulnerable families better.
2
Methods
Qualitative
secondary data analysis (QSDA) (Ruggiano, &
Perry, 2019) was used to conduct the research.
This study
used two sets of data: 1) a subset of findings from the larger annual study of
the Ministry of Social Politics of Ukraine; 2) a subset of findings from the
local annual studies of Regional Centers of Social
Services. The first and the second sets of data were collected in 2019 (before
the pandemic starts) and 2020 (in time of the pandemic). The researchers
conducting the QSDA were not involved in the parent studies. The official
requests were emailed to the Ministry and all Regional Centers
by the authors of this paper.
The data
received from the Ministry contained the information about the numbers of
social services providers in rural and urban territories in 2019, 2020; the
total numbers of social agencies’ clients during 2019-2020; and the list of
social services provided at the territorial communities in 2019, 2020.
The data
received from 20 Regional Centers of Social Services
(Kherson, Donetsk, Sumy, Poltava, Vinnytsia, Volyn, Dnipro, Dnipro, Zhytomyr,
Zakarpattia, Kyiv, Kirovohrad, Lviv, Mykolaiv, Rivne, Luhansk, Cherkasy,
Chernihiv, Chernivtsi, and Ternopil) of the 24 existing ones contained
information about types of clients (families) and factors that caused
vulnerability. This data were gathered by Regional Centers using standard reporting form № 12-soc, approved by
Ministry of Social Politics of Ukraine in 2017.
Research-question
approach in GSDA was used in writing secondary studies. The primary research
questions we wanted to answers on while analyzing received data were:
1.
What are the dynamics
of vulnerable families in 2019 and 2020 and do all of them receive social
services, what types of services?
2.
What are the factors
that caused vulnerability in families in Ukraine in 2019 and 2020 and what are
their main problems?
3.
Are there any dynamics
in creating of social services providers working with families in 2019 and 2020
in Ukraine?
These
primary research questions reflect the situation with social services providing
for vulnerable families and show the dynamics of increasing or decreasing
numbers of vulnerable families and factors which caused their vulnerability
before the pandemic time and in time of Covid-19 in Ukrainian context. It also
shows the dynamics of creating of social service providers ready to prevent
negative factors influencing the family and support vulnerable families who are
already suffer from some negative factors.
To find
answers on the research questions two sets of data were analyzed.
The researchers structure all data received from Regional Centers
in 20 excel files into one table. The data received from Ministry was used in
its primary form. The variables were generated before the data analysis.
All data
from parent study have been already coded before sending to researchers for
secondary analysis. IRB approval was obtained for the parent study.
Limitations
in the QSDA: 1) as no one from research team members were not included in the
parent study and had no influence on the primary analysis there is no strict
idea whether the data were collected correctly and in full; 2) authors conduct
the research with strict purpose using data that were collected for another
purpose – it limits a thematic finding that could be identified; 3) qualitative
secondary study conducting with data that were firstly collected and analyzed before can give changes in context and/or time
comparing with the data collected in present days.
3
Findings and Discussion
3.1
Family institutions in
Ukraine
Ukraine is
in the stage of actively applying a new approach to social welfare and social
work with families (Slozanska, 2020). A few laws
approved in 2016-2020 by the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine (On Social
Services, 2019; Methodical recommendations .., 2016;
Methodical recommendations.., 2017) forced the Amalgamated Territorial
Communities (ATCs), created due to the reform of decentralization
(Decentralization, 2021), to start their own local social agencies (Centers of social services providing (CSSP)) and finance
them from local budgets. In January 10, 2020, 1029
ATCs were in Ukraine (Ministry of Communities Territories Development of
Ukraine, 2020). Analysis of the Reports received from regions shows that in 2020
compared to 2019 the number of CSSP increased from 129 up to 205 (On approval
of the reporting form № 12-soc, 2017). It means that only 19,9% of ATCs full
fill the recommendation of the Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine and started
CSSP. Definitely, in rural areas there is better
progress than in urban ones: the number of these institutions increased in
rural areas from 97 (in 2019) to 167 (in 2020) (see Table 1).
Qualified
direct practitioners hired in CSSP have to provide at
least minimum packet of based social services for families after assessing
their needs (Slozanska, 2020) immediately
(emergency), constantly, temporarily or one time as fast as possible (On Social
Services, 2019). Services can be provided at the clients’ residence, in the
premises of a social service provider (stationary or semi-stationary) or at the
place of stay (at home). Also governmental (state and
communal) and non-governmental (institutions, enterprises, associations,
charities, religious organizations, natural persons and individuals) agencies
can be involved in social service delivering integrated, interdisciplinary,
family-oriented approaches (Slozanska, 2017, p.
77-101). Case management has been recognized as a major way for social services
providing for families in need (On Social Services, 2019).
Starting
from 2020, the ATCs took responsibility for social services providing to all
citizens due to their needs and interests on the “one-stop-shop” (Slozanska, 2020). But to do that is very hard because the
small number of social workers, employed in CSSP in Ukraine - only 3,100 at the
beginning of 2021 (Ministry of Social Policy of Ukraine, 2021). At the same
time, it is very important to monitor and evaluate the quality of social
services provided by social agencies. This is the responsibility of the Regional divisions of the National Social Service of Ukraine
(2020) will be created in each region.
3.2
Vulnerable families in
Ukraine
In
Ukraine, the term “families in difficult life circumstances” (On Social
Services, 2019) is used to nominate vulnerable families. There we refer
families who have the highest risk of getting into difficult situations due to
the influence of external and/or internal factors that negatively affect their
life, health, development and functioning and which they cannot cope with on
their own (On Social Services, 2019). According to the data obtained in 2019,
there were 122,337 vulnerable families in the study areas. However, in in 2020,
the first year of COVID-19, the number of vulnerable families decreased and
became 108,139. The same negative dynamic we observed in social services
providing to vulnerable families. In 2019 386,846 vulnerable families were
covered by services in Ukraine, while in 2020 – 330,334 (On approval of the
reporting form № 12-soc, 2017).
We have to mention that in 2020 compering with 2019 the number
of CSSP in the territorial communities in Ukraine increased almost twice. But
it had no positive effect on quantitative growth of provision of social
services for vulnerable families in the places of their residence. It is
explained by the fact that at the beginning of the 2020 the CSSP did not work
in Ukraine as it was unable to comply with quarantine conditions. After being
vaccinated (at the 2-3 quarter of the year) employed social workers started to
work with families and provide services. Social agencies created in ATCs made a
richer menu of services to vulnerable families in the pandemic time too and
proposed new way to provide them.
In Ukraine
there is a little confuse with classification of vulnerable families. This
happened mainly because of 1) reforms that are still going on in social welfare
and social work and 2) fact that social work as professional sphere, education
and research is on the stage of developing in Ukraine. Therefore, there are
different approaches to differentiation of types of vulnerable families. In the
new law On Social Services approved in 2019 vulnerable families are structured
due to factors that cause vulnerability: aging; inability to take care of
oneself; illness; mental and behavioral disorders;
disability; homelessness; unemployment; poverty; behavioral
disorders in children; carelessness; i) loss of
social ties (including because of prisoning); child abuse; gender-based
violence; domestic violence; human trafficking; damage caused by fire, natural
disaster, catastrophe, hostilities, terrorist act, armed conflict, temporary
occupation (On Social Services, 2019). While, the
Procedure for identifying families (people) in difficult life circumstances
(2020) is another document that provides totally different classification of
vulnerable families.
Such a
variety of approaches to classification of vulnerable families is also among
scientists. Thus, Galaguzova (2000) differentiates
four types of families in difficult life circumstances (with children, with
people with disabilities, with alcohol or drugs problems, with internal
conflict). Rudyak (2020) proposes classification of
families in need very closed to that mentioned in the Procedure for identifying
families (people) in difficult life circumstances (2020).
At the
same time all CSSP still use documents approved before 2019. For example, all
data about number of vulnerable families, their types and factors that cause
vulnerability is collected through the annual filling of a form dated 2012 (On
approval of the reporting form № 12-soc, 2012). It provides the third type of
classification of families in difficult life circumstances, different from
those given in the law On Social Services (2019) and in the Procedure (2020).
The
analysis with data received in the reports on 2019 and 2020 from 20 regions of
Ukraine (On approval of the reporting form № 12-soc, 2012) allowed us to define
the most typical types of families in difficult life circumstances. Among
families the number of which increased in 2020 compering with 2019 (see Fig. 1)
are: victims of domestic violence (on 0,8 % in 2020), families raising children
with disabilities and families with HIV status member (on 0,5 % in 2020 each),
aged people and migrant workers families (on 0,4 % in 2020 each). These types
of vulnerable families became clients of social workers not only in Ukraine.
The same tendencies were observed in the world too (Bordichuk,
2021; Khan et al., 2020; Usher et al., 2020). They were suffering of social
isolation (old ones) (Bordichuk, 2021), impossibility
to receive educational services (children with educational disabilities) Daftary et al., 2021) and due to the loss of external
connections (victims of domestic violence) (Usta, Murr, & El-Jarrah, 2021). Increasing in number of
migrants in 2020 is related to “open boundaries” for vaccinated Ukrainians.
Person living with HIV started to receive intensive, in-person and family-centered HIV primary care (Armbruster et al., 2020).
Almost the
same in both years were the number of families taking care of orphans, children
deprived parental care and Roma families. While in 2020, the number of foster
families tripled and the number of family type
orphaned increased to six. 191 children got services being in families of
guardians, trustees, foster families and family type orphaned in 2020. In 2019
there was no such child. This happened thanks to the reform of
deinstitutionalization, which was in an active phase of implementation in 2020
(Slozanska, Horishna,
2021).
Figure
1. Types of families in difficult life circumstances, the number of which
has increased in 2020, according to 2019
At the
same time analyzing the received data we observe the
decreasing in numbers of some types of families in 2020 comparing with 2019
(see Fig. 2). In Ukraine in 2020 became less the number of single parents (only
mothers) families, internally displaced families and families with
anti-terrorist operation participants, families with risk of social orphanhood,
families whose members lost social ties (including because of prisoning or
released from prison), families with members with behavioral
disorders (alcohol/drug-dependence), families receiving state assistance at the
birth of a child, families of guardians and trustees, families taking care with
disability and families whose members were victims of trafficking. But at the
same time transforming the got numbers into presents we saw that the number of
mentioned types of vulnerable families left almost the same in both years. The
exception is the percentage of internally displaced families and families with
anti-terrorist operation participants which number became less on 0,92 %. It
can be explained by the impossibility to move inside the country in the
pandemic time.
Figure
2. Types of families in difficult life circumstances, the number of which
has decreased in 2020, according to 2019
However,
the sent reports didn’t include information about other types of families in
difficult life circumstances mentioned in the law On Social Services (2019) and
the Procedure (2020). But the amount of each type of families is too small and
it is difficult to analyze. But,
there is no data about number of families with partial or complete loss of
physical activity, memory, unemployed, low-income or divorced families,
homelessness. This information is also interesting for analyses as many people
lost job in COVID-19 time, had huge troubles with health after being ill with
COVID, overlive emotional and psychological crisis, stayed alone.
It is
worse to mention that all these types of vulnerable families mentioned above
are characterized by low social status in any of the spheres of life,
impossibility to cope with the functions assigned to them and their adaptive
abilities are significantly reduced (Galaguzova,
2000, p. 76). However, each of it has its own unique dynamic, its strengths and weaknesses.
Due to the
law On Social Services (2019) and to the Procedure for identifying families
(people) in difficult life circumstances (2020), if a family faced at least one
of the above-mentioned factors and cannot cope with, it can be assumed that the
family is in difficult life circumstances. Social services in territorial
communities should be provided to support them.
The
analysis of the data given in the Reports from Ministry shows that in 2020,
compared to 2019, the number of families served during the year in the CSSP
increased from 52,157 to 64,407 (123.5% more than in the 2019) (see Table 1)
(On approval of the reporting form № 12-soc, 2012). At the same time, the
number of people served by the structural unit for the provision of social
services decreased slightly. These processes have been significantly influenced
by the decentralization reform that began in 2014 and aimed at forming
effective local self-government by optimizing local communities. As you can see
in the table 1.
Table 1.
Number of social services providers in ATCs.
|
Categories
|
Served
by a social service provider |
|||
|
Centers
of social services providing |
Structural
branch of the social services provider |
|||
|
2019 |
2020 |
2019 |
2020 |
|
|
Number of CSSP and their branches
during the reporting period |
129 |
205 |
99 |
90 |
|
Number of CSSP and their branches
in urban areas |
32 |
38 |
19 |
25 |
|
Number of CSSP and their branches
in rural areas |
97 |
167 |
80 |
75 |
|
Number of families (in person),
served during the reporting period |
52157 |
116564 |
11142 |
8514 |
|
Number of families (in person),
served during the reporting period in urban areas |
13365 |
33695 |
3021 |
2018 |
|
Number
of families (in person), served during the reporting period in rural areas |
38792 |
82869 |
8121 |
6496 |
As it is
seen from the table 1, the number of CSSP providing social services in ATCs for
vulnerable families increased in 22,7 % in 2020 comparing with 2019. As the
number of rural ATCs created in 2020 prevailed over rural ones, that logically,
that the number of CSSP in rural areas has increased significantly (on 35,1 %
in 2020). Number of vulnerable families, served during the reporting period in
CSSP also increased twice. And also CSSP placed in
rural areas served more clients too.
3.3
Problems encountered by
the vulnerable families in Ukraine
There was
no information about problems vulnerable families face in Ukraine in data
received from Ministry and Regional Centers. Based on
Oelze’s (2020) classification of family types, which
is close to our country, we analyzed papers on few
Ukrainian researchers (Heorhadze, 2019; Homenko, 2018; Kuzmenko, 2019;
Rybak, 2020; Sergienko, 2019; Sitnik,
2019; Slozanska, 2017; Tatarchuk,
2019; Yelagina, 2020) and structured typical
challenges of Ukrainian vulnerable families depending on family type:
· nuclear or
elementary families – consist of two parents and their children who are biological or
adopted – face many challenges and weaknesses, among which common are:
exclusiveness, which leads to isolation and stress, constant struggling with
conflict resolution, low income, neglecting of important things, etc.;
· single parent
families (increasing
in numbers during recent years in Ukraine (Voznyuk,
2021) – consist of one parent who either never has been married or has been
widowed/or divorced with one or more kids – to the cons of this family type can
be referred: low income, absence of possibility to work full-time, low quality
of childcare, inconsistency, especially if kids go back and forth between parents,
etc.;
· extended
family (“traditional”
family type in Ukraine) – consists of two or more adults (usually grandparents)
who are related through blood or marriage, usually along with children – to the weaknesses of such families referred: financial
problems, lack of privacy, conflicts, etc.;
· childless
family – units
who can't have, don't want to have or postpone having kids - to the weaknesses
of which are referred isolation, exclusiveness etc.;
· stepfamily – unit where two separate divorced
parents or one of them, with or without kids merge into one - in stepfamilies
children have the possibility to have two parents, but it also can create some
problems concerning growing up the children, solving problems, view on discipline;
· grandparent
family – unit
when one or more grandparent is raising their grandchild or grandchildren
because biological parents are not able properly to take care of their children
as they are abroad, in jail, on drugs, too young etc. – often have problems
with income, impossibility of grandparents to work full-time, have the health
and energy to rise children due to their needs.
Among main
problems of Ukrainian families in 2019 Georgadze
(2019, pp. 125-129) pointed out changing of family values, reluctance to have
(give birth) children, permanent stresses and
divorcing; Lazarenko and Kurova
(2019, p. 35), Skrypnyk and Pakushyna
(2019, pp. 389-391) - family conflicts, alcohol dependence of one or both
family members, financial difficulties, betrayal and jealousy; Mamrotska and Petrova (2018) - lack of own housing. In
COVID-19 times among main factors causing vulnerability Kalenyk
and Lysak (2020) point out poverty, Golina (2019) Katkova and Varina
(2020), Levadnya (2020), Palamarchuk
and Pedorych (2020), Prokopenko
(2020) - domestic violence. Moreover, the number of victims have
risen in COVID-times (Babkina, Tkachev,
& Danilchenko 2020; Chebanova
& Khlyvnyuk 2021; Timko 2020; Voznyuk
2021).
3.4
Services for vulnerable
families proposed in Ukraine
The law On
Social Services (2019) guarantees the basic social services providing to
vulnerable families due to their needs. Every year the Ministry of Social
Policy (MSP) and regional centers collect social and
economic data on social services delivery to families and individuals from all
regions of Ukraine (see Table 2). The MSP and regional centers
selected information about risk factors that are believed to adversely affect
families’ development or well-being. The received data is used to plan and do
state and regional programs of social services providing.
Table 2.
The title and number of social services provided to the vulnerable families in
2019-2020.
|
№ |
Basic social service due to the law On Social Services
(2019) |
2019 |
2020 |
|
1 |
Social support |
30243 |
27360 |
|
2 |
Consultancy |
315319 |
255803 |
|
3 |
Social prevention |
122500 |
106467 |
|
4 |
Social integration and reintegration |
16271 |
12609 |
|
5 |
Social adaptation |
41186 |
40650 |
|
6 |
Arrangement to family forms of care |
378 |
1032 |
|
7 |
Crisis and emergency intervention |
4088 |
4118 |
|
8 |
Representation of interests |
48476 |
42752 |
|
9 |
Mediation |
12195 |
9762 |
The number
of services provided by type increased in 2020 compared to 2019, except for
family placement / care and crises and emergency intervention services (Table
2). The most provided for the reporting period were counseling
and social prevention services.
3.5
Recommendations
So, the
number of vulnerable families in Ukraine before the COVID-19 and during the
pandemic time is high. In time of COVID-2019 the number of victims of domestic
violence, families raising children with disabilities, families with HIV status
member, aged people and migrant workers families increased significantly.
Factors that caused vulnerability in 2019 are different that those in 2020.
Poverty and domestic violence were dominant. Social services providers do all
the best to provide in time support and social services to all vulnerable
families. But, unfortunately, their work in COVID-19 times were not regular.
At the
same time, we noted some problematic moments. Due to the analyzed
data and current literature alignment, the research team developed the
following recommendations which are related not specifically to the COVID-19 time, but have some broader context. Their realization will
make the work with vulnerable families to productive/
Suggestions for government (The Ministry of Social Politics of Ukraine)
The
Ministry of Social Politics has a vital role and responsibility in the
development of high quality social services for
vulnerable families at local level. To make this process more understandable
during this time, the following ideas will support the developing of social
services for vulnerable families and help them to fight with the factors that
caused the risk.
· Align
regulatory framework. The analysis of regulatory acts in social
service providing shows the difference in differentiating of types of the
families in difficult life circumstances given particularly in the Laws (On
Social Services, 2019; the Procedure …2020) and in Report (On approval of the
reporting form № 12-soc, 2017). Moreover, the large annual study of The
Ministry of Social Politics of Ukraine and local annual studies of Regional Centers of Social Services which are prepared every year on
the demand of the Ministry of Social Policy contain data due to the Law On Social Services of 2003 which has expired when new Law
(2019) has come into force in 2020. But, not confusing, it is useful to bring
in compliance with all documentation and reporting requirements in accordance
with applicable laws.
· Develop a
Strategic Action Plan to Support Families in Difficult Life Circumstances. Nowadays it is important to build
and support a strict social services providing system
for families in difficult life circumstances at ATCs. Local Governments should
think about a Strategic Action Plan that should be developed based on a
qualitative assessment of community members' needs and with the input of
stakeholders from multiple sectors. As part of the Strategic Action Plan ensure
the social workers are main service providers for families and children in ATCs
who need the support and finance at the very beginning; clarify their actions
and timelines, measures of social services quality assessment. To make the Plan
fully implemented it is good to organize cooperation and coordination between
government, social agencies and citizens at ATCs to
provide a full spectrum of social services for families in difficult life
circumstances. The assessment, monitoring of social services provided at ATCs
and connection to them of community citizens is important too.
· Develop the
Early Intervention Service at ATCs. The families need to be identified for
additional support at the earliest sign of crises. It is important to organize
the network which members can mobilize and collaborate to support and help the
family in need. This will help to prevent a child from institualization.
Suggestions for Social Services Providers
In Ukraine
governmental and non-govermental (NGOs) organizations
play a vital role in supporting vulnerable families due to the law On Social
Services (2019). The new Law aims to introduce a new model of social services
providing which is based on creating a market for such services. This model
demands the improvement of the social services system’s management in the
context of decentralization and developing the unique approaches in its
organization at the local level (Semigina, 2020).
Local self-government in Ukraine has already started some new social agencies
to solve the existing locally social problems. However, the analysis of their
work shows that not all of them can provide demanding high quality social
services at the local level because of lack of:
government’s strict position in social support and welfare of vulnerable
families in Ukraine; understanding of the necessity of creating of social
agencies locally; knowledge and skills of already employed social workers to
full fill their roles in new conditions (Slozanska,
2017). In such a situation, social agencies providing social services at the
local level have to correspond to existing demands, be
nimble and proactive.
· Revise
Strategy. To
provide social services to vulnerable families social
agencies need to revise their strategies, developing them based on the good
assessment of citizens' demands, own and involved resources, constraints, possibilities
of cooperation and activities. Considering this as an opportunity for
innovation can help social agencies to identify effective solutions.
· Adapt
Approaches. Adapting social services providing approaches
to developed State Standards of Social Services Delivering (we have 17 of them
for each basic social service mentioned in the Law On
Social Service (2019)) is another important step to maintain effectiveness,
making them systematic. Being cyclical, continued and
flexible in providing social services of high quality for families in need at
ATCs, adaptive to changing conditions working with each individual and family
using remote methods to monitor and support them are also important challenges
social agencies have to cope with.
· Empower ATCs
and People. Communities
can care for families long-term, especially in situations when social agencies
are limited in resources and services they provide. Building strong networks
can help to create a framework to support families in need within the ATCs and
out of it. Active citizens can be good volunteers and good partners in helping
families at an early stage of getting into difficult life situations. Citizens
can serve as a liaison between local-government entities, social agencies and vulnerable families.
References:
(2019). Social work and disasters: A handbook for practice. Routledge.
(2012). The social functions
of the family. Euromentor Journal, 3(2), 1-7.
(2020). Addressing health inequities exacerbated by COVID-19 among youth
with HIV: expanding our toolkit. Journal of Adolescent Health, 67(2), 290-295.
(2020). Legal and forensic aspects of domestic violence in Ukraine. Ukrainian Journal of Medicine, Biology and Sports. 4(26): 336-342. DOI: 10.26693/jmbs05.04.336
(2016). "
Vulnerable families": reflections on a difficult category. CEPS Journal,
6(4), 11-28.
(2010). Vulnerability in the
transition to adulthood: Defining risk based on youth profiles. Children and
youth services review, 32(4), 487-495.
(2021). Loneliness and social
isolation of the elderly during the Covid-19 pandemic: factors that cause them.
Social work and education, 8(2).
(2021). The impact of the pandemic on domestic violence against
children. Available online: http://dspace.onu.edu.ua:8080/bitstream/
123456789/31042/1/45-47.pdf (accessed on 29 March 2021).
(2017). ‘You become two in
one’: Women’s representations of responsibility and emotional vulnerability in
Zimbabwean father-away families. International Social Work, 60(2), 366-378.
(2013). Effectiveness of early intervention programs for children with
mental disorders. Visnyk of Kharkiv National
University named after V. N. Karazin. Series: Psychology. 1046 (51), 184-186.
Available online: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/VKhIPC_2013_1046_51_42 (accessed on 29 March 2021).
(2021). Pivoting during a pandemic: School social work practice with
families during COVID-19. Children & Schools, 43(2), 71-78.
(2021). https://uareforms.org/en/reforms/Decentralization
(accessed on 20 June 2021).
(2017). Social work with families. In Okoye, U., Chukwu, N. & Agwu, P. (Eds.). Social work in Nigeria: Book of readings
(pp. 185–197). Nsukka: University of Nigeria Press Ltd
(2009). Vulnerability: Questioning the certainties in social work and
health. International social work, 52(4), 473-484.
(2000). Social pedagogy: a course of lectures. Moscow: Humanit. ed. VLADOS Center, 416.
(2014). Handbook of social work practice with vulnerable and resilient populations. Columbia University Press
Golina, V. V. (2019). Domestic violence: legal and criminological directions
and measures to prevent its manifestations in Ukraine. Available online: https://ivpz.kh.ua/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/%D0%97%D0%B1%D1%96%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA-%D0%BA%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B9-%D1%81%D1%82%D1%96%D0%BB-4.pdf#page=35
(accessed on 27 November 2020).
(2021). Social vulnerability as the intersection of tangible and
intangible variables: a proposal from an inductive approach. Revista Nacional de Administración,
12(2), e3773-e3773.
(2020). They are essential workers now, and should continue to be: Social workers and home
health care workers during COVID-19 and beyond. Journal of Gerontological
Social Work. 1–3. doi: 10.1080/01634372.2020.1779162.
(2019). The functioning of the family in the
condition of Ukrainian social policy. Youth and market 1, no. 168: 125-129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24919/2308-4634.2019.158764
(2009). Beyond
‘vulnerability’: An ecological model approach to conceptualizing risk of sexual
violence against people with learning difficulties. British Journal of Social
Work, 39(1), 99-112.
Homenko, N. (2018). Unfunctioned family as a
psychological and pedagogical problem. Student scientific dimension of
socio-pedagogical problems present: a collection of materials of the II
International scientific and practical conference (April 26, 2018, Nizhyn) / For the general. ed. О. Lisovetc.
Nizhyn: NDU. M. Gogol: 82. Available online: http://www.ndu.edu.ua/storage/2018/zbirnuk_tez_2018.pdf#page=83
(accessed on 15 November 2020).
Kalenyk, O. P., & Lysak, N. P. (2020). Poverty as
a socio-psychological background to the development of the modern family: 28.
Available online: https://kneu.edu.ua/userfiles/fupstap/Tr_ta_N__26_02_2020.pdf#page=29
(accessed on 27 March 2021).
Katkova, T. A., & Varina, G. B. (2020). Psychological support for women
suffered from domestic violence. Conference Proceedings of the International
Scientific Online Conference Topical Issues of Society Development in the
Turbulence Conditions. The School of Economics and Management in Public
Administration in Bratislava. pp. 344-351. Available online: http://eprints.mdpu.org.ua/id/eprint/11213/1/Conference%20Proceedings_VSEMvs_30.5.2020-344-351-2-8.pdf
(accessed on 29 March 2021).
(2020). Service providers' perceptions of families caring for children
with disabilities in resource‐poor settings in South Africa. Child & Family
Social Work, 25(4), 823-831.
(2018). Typology of families
on various grounds. Collection of scientific works of Uman
State Pedagogical University named after Pavel Tychyna,
(2), 131-142.
(2015). HDAC family members
intertwined in the regulation of autophagy: a druggable vulnerability in
aggressive tumor entities. Cells, 4(2), 135-168.
(2010). Modern Ukrainian multigenerational family: decline or prosperity?. Bulletin of Lviv University. Sociological
Series, (4), 246-253.
(2021). Relevance and social
significance of the problem of conflicts between young couples. Education and
science, (1).
(2019). New models of
parenthood: factors, trends, characteristics. Current problems of sociology,
psychology, pedagogy, 40 (1-2). Available online:
http://apspp.soc.univ.kiev.ua/index.php/home/article/viewFile/877/750 (accessed
on 15 November 2020).
Lazarenko, A. H., & Kurova, A.A. (2019). Divorse as one of the problems of modern society. Editorial
Board: 35. Available online: http://repository.sspu.sumy.ua/bitstream/123456789/7303/1/%D0%A2%D0%BE%D0%BC-2.pdf#page=35
(accessed on 27 November 2020).
(2020). Psychological violence
as a kind of relationship in the family. Available online:
https://ela.kpi.ua/bitstream/123456789/39762/1/S_r_i_s_X_2020-113-115.pdf
(accessed on 29 March 2021).
(2002). Social work, stress and burnout: A review. Journal of mental health,
11(3), 255-265.
(2018). Student family: problems and
prospects. Available online: https://cardfile.onaft.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/9364/1/Ekonom_ta_sots_aspekty%20rozv_2018_Mamrotska.pdf
(accessed on 27 November 2020).
Methodical recommendations for
the implementation of the united territorial community (self-governing) powers
in the sphere of social protection of the community members. (2016a). Ukraine:
Government Publications. Available online:
http://www.mlsp.gov.ua/labour/control/uk/publish/article?art_id=186204&cat_id=107177.
(accessed on 01 September 2019).
Methodical recommendations for
the organization of social services order. (2016b). Ukraine: Government
Publications. Available online: http://www.mlsp.gov.ua/labour/control/uk/publish/article.
(accessed on 01 September 2019).
Ministry of Communities
Territories Development of Ukraine. (2020). Available online: https://www.minregion.gov.ua/press/news/shho-u-rozvitku-gromad-i-teritoriy-vidbulosya-za-2019-rik-dani-monitoringu-detsentralizatsiyi/
(accessed on 01 March 2022).
Ministry of Social Policy.
(2017). On approval of the reporting form № 12-soc (annual) "Report on the
organization of social services" and instructions for its completion (from
30.01.2017 № 138). Available online: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0251-17#Text
(accessed on 01 March 2021).
(2020). Can a virus undermine human rights? The
Lancet Public Health. 5: E238–e239. doi:
10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30092-X.
(2018). Implementation of the
early intervention system in Ukraine. Education of people with special needs:
ways of development.1, no. 14, 134-139.
Novytska, I. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on the level of
domestic violence in Ukraine and the world. Available online: http://elar.naiau.kiev.ua/bitstream/123456789/19159/1/%D0%97%D0%91%D0%86%D0%A0%D0%9D%D0%98%D0%9A%2014.12.2020_p134-137.pdf
(accessed on 29 March 2021).
(2020). There are 6 different
family types and each one has a unique family dynamic. Available online:
https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/family/there-are-6-different-family-types-and-each-one-has-a-unique-family-dynamic/
(accessed on 15 March 2021).
On Social Services (Ukraine) 17.01.2019,
No 2671-VIII. Available online: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2671-19
(accessed on 01 Febuary 2020)
(2005). Poverty, vulnerability and family size: evidence from the
Philippines. Poverty strategies in Asia, 171.
(2020). Domestic violence as a
socio-pedagogical problem. Scientific Bulletin of the North. Series: Education.
Social and behavioral sciences: a scientific journal / Academy of the State
Penitentiary Service. Chernihiv: DPtS Academy, 1 (4),
85. DOI 10.32755/sjeducation.2020.01.085
(2021). Park's text book of preventive and social medicine. Edition: 26th.
Publisher: Banarsidas Bhanot
Publishers.
(2020). Pandemics
and Violence Against Women and Children. Center for Global Development Working
Paper. 528.
(2009). Families in difficult situations. Indian Journal of Social Work.
70.2, 191-218.
(2020). Available online: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/587-2020-%D0%BF#Text
(accessed on 21 March 2021).
(2020). Combating domestic
violence in the mechanism of protection of human and civil rights and freedoms.
(2012). Association between family composition and the well-being of
vulnerable children in Nairobi, Kenya. Maternal and Child Health Journal,
16(6), 1232-1240.
(2021). Vulnerability, family violence and
institutionalization: narratives for elderly and professionals in social welcome
center. Revista gaúcha de enfermagem, 42.
(2020). Classification of
persons who find themselves in difficult life circumstances. Current issues of
state and law, (86), 197-203.
(2019). Conducting
secondary analysis of qualitative data: Should we, can we, and how?. Qualitative Social Work, 18(1), 81-97.
Rybak, V. (2020). The Social
and Psychological Factors of Conflicts in the Family. (Master’s thesis). Herson. HDU: 85. Available online: http://ekhsuir.kspu.edu/handle/123456789/12730
(accessed on 15 November 2020).
(2020). Local Self-Government
Transformations in Ukraine and Reforms of Social Services: Expectations and
Challenges. Traektoriâ Nauki,
6(01), 1001-1006.
Sergienko, M. (2019). Social work with young families in the period of adaptation
to married life. (Master’s thesis): 97. Available online: https://ir.stu.cn.ua/handle/123456789/19129
(accessed on 15 November 2020).
Shatska, M. (2019). The family as a small social group and social institution.
Scientific developments of youth at the present stage. Kyiv National University
of Technology and Design, 525-526. Available online: https://er.knutd.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/14261/3/NRMSE2019_V3_P525-526.pdf
(accessed on 15 November 2020).
(2019).
Support for large families as a priority of the state family policy. State
building 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34213/db.19.01.15
(2015). RESILIENCE AND
VULNERABILITY: COMPETING SOCIAL PARADIGMS?. Scientific
Annals of the “Alexandru Ioan
Cuza” University, Iaşi. New
Series SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL WORK Section, 8(1).
Skrypnyk, M. A., & Pakushyna, L. Z. (2019).
General characteristics of divorce as a social phenomenon: the dynamics of
divorce. Actual problems of natural and human sciences in researches
of young scientists “Raisin-2019” / XXI All-Ukrainian scientific conference of
young scientists, 389-391. Available online: http://eprints.cdu.edu.ua/3643/1/rodzinka_2019%20-389-391.pdf
(accessed on 27 November 2020).
Slee, Phillip T. (2006). Families at risk: the effects of chronic and
multiple disadvantage. Shannon Research Press.
Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272727914_Families_at_Risk
(accessed on 25 November 2020).
Slozanska, H. (2017). Social protection of the population in the conditions of
the united territorial community. Ministry of education and science of Ukraine,
M.Dragomanov national
pedagogical university, 205. Available online:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/HannaSlozanska/publication/315976888_Socialnij_zahist_naselenna_v_umovah_ob%27ednanoi_teritorialnoi_gromadi/links/58ed30b70f7e9b37ed14d88e/Socialnij-zahist-naselenna-v-umovah-obednanoi-teritorialnoi-gromadi.pdf#page=205
(accessed on 15 November 2020).
(2017). Are current state
social agencies able to provide social services to the population at the ATCs
effectively: selected study. Social work and education, 4(2), 77-101.
(2017). Social services: are
current state social agencies ready to provide them on the level of local
communities in Ukraine (selective survey). Social work and education. 4 (2),
77-101.
(2018). Social work in the
territorial community: theories, models and methods:
monograph. Ternopil: TNPU them. V. Hnatyuk, 382 p.
(2016). The activity of social workers on the provision of social
services to the population in the territorial community. Collection of
scientific works of Khmelnitsky Institute of Social Technologies of the
University of Ukraine, (12), 113-118.
Slozanska, H., Horishna, N., and Romanovska, L. (2020). Community
Social Work in Ukraine: towards the Development of New Practice Models. Socialinė teorija, empirija, politika ir praktika. 20, 53-66.
Some issues of the National
Social Service of Ukraine: Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine; List,
Regulations of 26.08.2020 № 783. Database "Legislation of Ukraine". Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. Available online: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/go/783-2020-%D0%BF
(accessed on 19 March 2021).
(2001). Understanding families
in India: A reflection of societal changes. Psicologia:
Teoria e Pesquisa, 17, 177–86.
(2017). Ukraine: Government Publications. Available online:
http://www.msp.gov.ua/timeline/Decentralizaciya-vladi-.html. (accessed on 19 March 2021).
(2003). Family pediatrics: Report of the Task Force on the Family.
Pediatrics, 111(6), 1541-1571.
Tatarchuk, А. (2019). Features of social work with children from distant
families. (Master’s thesis): 85. Available online: http://ir.stu.cn.ua/handle/123456789/19114
(accessed on 15 November 2020).
(2006). Building social
capital in vulnerable families: Success markers of a school-based intervention
program. Youth & Society, 38(2), 155-176.
(2020). What does the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mean for
families? JAMA Pediatrics. doi:
10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.0828.
(2020). Domestic violence in the context of the
COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic in Ukraine. (2020). Available
online:
http://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/bitstream/handle/123456789/18704/Tymko_Domashnie_nasylstvo_v_umovakh_pandemii_koronavirusu_COVID-19_v_Ukraini.pdf?sequence=1
(accessed on 29 March 2021).
(2017). A systematic review of risk and protective factors associated
with family related violence in refugee families. Child abuse & neglect,
70, 315-330.
(1992). Bangkok, Thailand: Bangkok, Thailand:
UNESCO.
(2020). Family violence and COVID‐19: Increased
vulnerability and reduced options for support. Int J Ment
Health Nurse, 549-552.
(2021). COVID-19 Lockdown and the increased violence against women:
understanding domestic violence during a pandemic. Violence and gender, 8(3),
133-139.
(2020). COVID-19: Reducing
the risk of infection might increase the risk of intimate partner violence. EClinical Medicine. doi:
10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100348.
(2019). Social work practice with families: A resiliency-based approach.
Oxford University Press, USA.
(2020). The
contested concept of vulnerability: a literature review. European Journal of
Social Work, 23(2), 327-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13691457. 2018.1508001
Voznyuk, T. (2021). Exacerbation of the problem of domestic violence in a
Pandemic. Recommended for publication by the Academic Council of Zhytomyr State
University named after Ivan Franko (Minutes № 3 of March 26, 2021): 57.
Available online: http://eprints.zu.edu.ua/32400/1/%D0%B7%D0%B1%D1%96%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%20%D0%9B%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%86%D1%8C%2016.pdf
(accessed on 29 March 2021).
(2020). Systematic review of
community- and home-based interventions to support parenting and reduce risk of
child maltreatment among families with substance-exposed newborns. Child
Maltreatment. 25(2), 137–151. doi:
10.1177/1077559519866272.
Yelagina, M. (2020). The main factors of problems in the modern Ukrainian
family. Social work and modernity: theory and practice of professional and
personal development of a social worker: materials of the Tenth International
scientific-practical conference (December 18, 2020, Kyiv). KPI. Igor Sikorsky,
FSP, CF. Kyiv: Lira-K: 66–69. Available online: https://ela.kpi.ua/bitstream/123456789/39168/1/S_r_i_s_X_2020-66-69.pdf
(accessed on 20 March 2021).
:
Anna Slozanska
Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatyuk National Pedagogical
University
Ternopil, Ukraine
+380971838135
annaslozanska@gmail.com
:
Svitlana Stelmakh
Department of Pedagogics and Social Work
HEI Ukrainian Catholic University
Lviv, Ukraine
pedagog@ucu.edu.ua
:
Iryna Krynytska
Department of Pedagogics and Social Work
HEI Ukrainian Catholic University
Lviv, Ukraine
krynytska@ucu.edu.ua