Four perspectives on the quality of life of children at risk kept at home and removed from home in Israel

This study compares quality of life (QOL) assessments of two groups of Israeli children at risk, those kept at home and those removed from home, made by four assessors: the caseworker who made the decision, a professional uninvolved in the decision, the child, and a parent. Findings based on 120 assessments of 30 children showed that all four assessors rated the QOL of the children in alternative care higher than that of the children at home, that the children and their parents consistently rated the children's QOL higher than the professionals, and that there was no significant difference in the ratings of the case workers and the uninvolved professionals. Despite the study's methodological limitations, these findings point to the possible benefits of placement for children at risk, and provide grounds for believing that caseworkers' QOL assessments are not biased by attempts at self-justification.