Family-Centered Practices in EI/ECSE Are Important but Uneven

Babies rely on their families to advocate for them in the world, as they cannot yet speak for themselves. Early childhood and special education policies emphasize the importance of the family’s role in making decisions for young children in their critical early years of development. It follows that a core tenet of high-quality early intervention and early childhood special education (EI/ECSE) is the importance of centering a child’s family in all services.

Working collaboratively with the family to build parents’ skills and knowledge to support mutually agreed-upon goals is included in standards for preparing the EI/ECSE workforce. Yet a recent study published in the Journal of Early Intervention found that many parents do not experience family-centered best practices when navigating EI/ECSE services. The authors conducted a qualitative metasynthesis, which allowed them to analyze interviews and other qualitative information across several studies.

The researchers found that parents from White, middle-class, highly educated backgrounds are more likely to report being satisfied with EI/ECSE services and outcomes than are parents of color, parents with low incomes, and parents with low education levels. Families with fewer social advantages (e.g., money, education, relationships, networks) and structural advantages (e.g., more privileged positions amidst systemic racism and ableism) had a more difficult time accessing EI/ECSE services. When they did access services, they had less opportunity to collaborate and make decisions, and reported that some providers acted disrespectful, unempathetic, and distrustful. Parents reported that they did not voice concerns and desires with EI/ECSE providers because they were not given the opportunity or because they feared retribution that would harm their children.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) assumes that all families have equal ability to leverage economic, cultural, and social capital (e.g., money, social networks, and institutional knowledge), noted lead author Dr. Ruby Batz in our email correspondence. In fact, external forces like systemic and structural racism and ableism deeply affect families’ experiences and strategies, particularly for historically marginalized families. These external forces can worsen power dynamics between families and institutions, policies, and practices, and compound privilege for some families while perpetuating disadvantage for others, she notes. “In general, the field says that if we educate parents about the system, they will be able to advocate. But we know it is not enough to advocate if the system is not equipped to truly welcome students with disabilities.”

Although family-centered practices are a standard for preparation of the EI/ECSE workforce, the metasynthesis found that many EI/ECSE providers do not believe they are adequately trained in these practices, particularly when working with families of different demographic groups than themselves. The authors call for a reexamination of higher education and professional development programs to better prepare EI/ECSE providers in working with families from historically marginalized statuses. They also call for better training of providers, leaders, and researchers to examine and disrupt systemic inequities within EI/ECSE systems. “The EI/ECSE system…conceals how families pervasively encounter intertwined experiences of racism, ableism, and discrimination while navigating services,” the researchers write. “Structural and social inequality are in fact built into daily interactions and procedures within EI/ECSE systems.”

Policymakers should address systemic inequalities in EI/ECSE services at the system-level, rather than on an individual basis, the authors note. “How can we authentically love and honor all children with disabilities or labeled as disabled and their families, particularly when our perceptions and understandings of them have been distorted by deeply ingrained prejudices, stigma, and biases rooted in racism, ableism, and white supremacy? Recognizing and challenging these systemic barriers is essential to creating a nurturing and inclusive environment that values and uplifts every child's unique strength, experiences, and potential,” said Dr. Batz. She notes that there has been an increase in naming racism and ableism within the EI/ECSE disciplines, for instance the Division for Early Childhood’s Racial Equity Point of View and the Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center’s Advancing Racial Equity in Early Intervention and Preschool Special Education.

Improving family experiences requires asking more of EI/ECSE systems, rather than placing the burden of improvement on families. “Because special education is founded under a medical model of disability, as a field our gaze is located at the individual and group level where our perception of children with disabilities is distorted,” she said. Special education meetings therefore become deficit-based processes where, as a mother she recently interviewed put it, "children are pulled apart in pieces but never put back together as a whole." When policymakers address systemic inequities, listen to families, and improve training for practitioners, they can make meaningful changes to truly center families in EI/ECSE.