As a forensic treatment professional, I selected two forensic settings in my community and they were: group home and foster care. I compared the two forensic settings in terms of available resources, access to treatment, and social support. After the comparison, I realized that the two forensic settings received social support from the public and government. However, the difference was that the group home did not have an assigned caregiver that was contrary to foster care (Maschi, Bradley & Ward, 2009).
A Group Home
The social support offered in group homes can be grouped into psychological, emotional, and material support. There are volunteers that visit homes to take care of the residents. They bring donations and gifts to the residents while some offer their professional support like counseling. In addition, the state contributes to the residential group home services. The homes are located in the middle-class suburbs and, therefore, enjoy an awesome community image (Levinson, 2005).
The residents of the group home often access treatment through the treatment centers located within the homes. The residential treatment centers are typically equipped with qualified personnel and equipment. They provide an environment for the treatment of most of the children while those who might need better health services are taken outside the setting (Levinson, 2005).
The available resource for the group homes is the neighborhood infrastructure that has universal design and access. They have access to banks, shopping malls and transportation since most of them are located in the middle-class neighborhood. Even though they are limited, some of the group homes allow the residents to access the internet (Levinson, 2005).
A Foster Care
One of the social supports offered to the foster children involves foster parents group educational program. The program enlightens the parents about their association with the children. Besides, they are allowed to have a face- to- face family contact, even more, they are authorized to participate in leisure activities and mingle with friends (Chipungu & Bent- Goodley, 2004).
The available resources for the foster care minors are funds from the government. They also have regular supervision and provide a place where a person can report in case of mistreatment. Most of the resources might differ from one care home to another depending on the financial situation and relations to the caregiver. All their needs are usually catered even though the foster parent can misuse the money (Chipungu & Bent- Goodley, 2004).
The foster children access health in public hospitals and the same time, state officials regularly check their health. The foster cares are located in areas accessible to the amenities and other resources. Some foster children in wards or group homes access health at residential treatment centers. The centers are centrally located in the forensic setting, and the children are issued with treatment codes (Chipungu & Bent- Goodley, 2004).
In conclusion, the similarities outweigh the differences between the two forensic settings. As a current helping forensic professional, I realized that both the group home and foster care obtain social support from the public and government. The public offers material and technical support to the settings while the government offers administrative and financial support. In addition, the two forensic settings rely greatly on the government and are located in the middle-class suburbs. However, the main difference is that group home residents do not have an assigned caregiver, contrary to foster care.
References
Chipungu, S. S. & Bent- Goodley, T. B. (2004). Meeting the Challenges of Contemporary Foster Care. The Future of Children, 14 (1), 74- 93.
Levinson, J. (2005). The Group Home Workplace and the Work of Know- How. Human Studies, 28 (1), 57- 85.
Maschi, T., Bradley, C., & Ward, K. (2009). Forensic social work: Psychosocial and Legal Issues in diverse practice settings. New York, NY: Springer Pub.